Neela Ram Manohar And Another v. The State Of A.P. And Another

SMT JUSTI CE T. RAJANI CRI MI NAL PETI TI ON No. 2 1 0 0 of 2 0 1 1 ORDER:

This petition is filed seeking for quashment of the proceedings against the petitioners, who are A1 and A2 in Crime No.53 of 2011, respectively, on the file of Jangaon Police Station, Jangaon, Warangal District. The offences alleged are under Sections 147, 353, 427, 186 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

2.

Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1. None appears for respondent No.2 in spite of notice.

3.

A perusal of the complaint shows that the allegations sofar as the offence under Section 3(i)(x) of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, "the Act") is concerned, are very vague. The complaint is given by a Doctor working in the Government Hospital. The allegations are that the petitioners and some other associates entered the conference hall and some of them abused in their caste name. But there is no allegation that the allegations are against the complainant. Moreover, the persons, who made the abuses, are not categorically mentioned.

4.

The counsel for the petitioners relies on a ruling of the Apex Court in Gor ige Pen t aiah vs. St at e of An dh r a

Pr adesh 1, wherein the Supreme Court in similar factual situation quashed the proceedings against the petitioners therein, holding that when the basic ingredients of the offence are missing in the complaint, then permitting such a complaint to continue and to compel the appellant to face the rigmarole of the criminal trial would be totally unjustified, leading to abuse of process of law. It was also held that according to the basic ingredients of Section 3(i)(x) of the Act, the complainant ought to have alleged that the appellant/ accused was not a member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe and he (respondent No.3) was intentionally insulted or intimidated by the accused with intent to humiliate in a place within public view. 5.

Even in this complaint, such allegations are missing. Hence, in view of the same, the proceedings so far as offences under Sections 3(i)(x) of the Act are concerned, need to be quashed. But as regards the other offences, the allegations prima facie constitute the alleged offences. Hence, quashment of proceedings with regard to the other offences is declined. However, considering the plea of the petitioners' counsel, the police are directed to follow the guidelines enunciated by the Supreme Court in Ar n esh Ku m ar v. St at e of Bih ar an d an ot h er ( Cr l.Appeal No.1 2 7 7 of 2 0 1 4 ) 2, before effecting the arrest of the petitioners.

6.

With the above observations, the Criminal Petition is partly allowed quashing the proceedings in Crime No.53 of 2011 on the 1 2008(1) SCC 531 2 (2014) 8 SCC 273

file Jangaon Police Station, Jangaon, Warangal District, insofar as the offence under Section 3(i)(x) of the Act against the petitioners is concerned and the proceedings insofar as the other offences against the petitioners shall go on. Interim stay, granted by this court in Crl.P.M.P.No.2130 of in Crl.P.No.2100 of 2011, dated 14.03.2011, shall stand vacated. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ T. RAJANI , J December 13, 2017 LMV