Ravindra S/O Vijay Palhade and 4 Others vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Ps Shegaon Icty Tq.Shegaon Dist.Buldhana and Another

Ganesh s/o Ashok Kathole, aged about 28 years, occupation: labour, r/o beside school No.2, Malipura, taluka Shegaon, district: Buldhana. ….. Applicants.

¶12

:: V E R S U S ::

¶13

State of Maharashtra, through its Police Station Officer, Shegaon City Police Station, taluka Shegaon, district Buldhana.

¶14

Mrs.Reena w/o Kailash Ingle, aged about 35 years, occupation: agriculture

.....2/-

Judgment

2

40 apl552.24

labour, r/o Milind Nagar, Shegaon, district: Buldhana. ….. Non-applicants .

¶20

================================ Shri H.V.Dhage, Counsel for Applicants. Mrs.R.S.Sharma, APP for NA No.1/State. Ms Gargi Bhai, Counsel Appointed for NA No.2. ================================ CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J. DATE : 10/04/2026

¶21

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶22

Heard. Admit . Heard finally by consent.

¶23

By this application, applicants are seeking quashing of

¶24

FIR in connection with Crime No.228/2022 registered with non-applicant No.1 police station for offences under Sections 323 and 324 read with 34 of the IPC and under Section 3(1) (r), 3(1)(s), and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities), Act, 1989 and consequent proceeding arising out of the same bearing chargesheet No.64/2022.

¶25

The crime is registered on the basis of a report lodged

¶26

by non-applicant No.2 (the complainant) on allegations that

.....3/-

3

Judgment

40 apl552.24

on 25.2.2022, at about 8:45 pm, when the complainant and her husband were present in their house, their son Kunal came in a scared condition and informed that when he was watching “Wedding Procession” near “Mahatma Fule Statue Nagar” along with his friends Jay Savdekar, Sumit Khsnderao, Suryaprakash Shegokar and others, some people had exchange of hot words with them. At that time, two persons have assaulted him by means of sticks and fists and kick blows as well as his friends. Thereafter, said persons have run away.

¶32

Second incident narrated is that, when the

¶33

complainant was proceeding in front of house of the present applicants, applicant Nos.1 and 3 have abused her on her caste by saying, “---------- jfoaUnz iYgkMs ;kus yksdkP;k leksj eyk] ;k egkjkauk f’kukyP;kauk dkgh ektksu >kys dh] vkeP;kp ?kjklkeks#u jLrk fnlrs dk;] f’kukyps tkLr ektysr ;kaph ftjok ykxrs- ekaxVs lkys ektysr tkLr v’kh yksdkaleksj f’kohxkG dsyh- R;kposGsl R;kph iRuh #ikyh iYgkMs gh ? kjke/kwu vkyh o g;k f’kukyk tkLr ektY;k ;k;ys tkLr eLrh vkyh v’kh

.....4/-

4

Judgment

40 apl552.24

f’kohxkG dsyh- rso<;kr jfoaUnz iYgkMs ;kus ek>s MksD;koj dsl /k#u vkss dsl vks<r vlrkauk furhu iYgkMs gk vkyk o R;kus dks.krh ekaxVh vkgs ikgw ns ;k f’kukykph yk nk[kok ykxrs-------”

¶39

On the basis of the said report, the police have registered the crime against present applicants.

¶40

After registration of the crime, investigation was conducted and during the investigation, statements of various witnesses are recorded and after completion of the investigation, chargesheet came to be filed.

¶41

Learned counsel for applicants submitted that out of complaint lodged by applicants and to give a counter blast to the said complaint, this FIR came to be lodged.

¶42

He submitted that as far as allegations are concerned,

¶43

the same are general, vague, and omnibus in nature. No specific role is attributed to any of applicants.

¶44

He has also invited my attention to various statements

¶45

of witness and submitted that offences under Section 3(1)(r),

.....5/-

Judgment

40 apl552.24

5

3(1)(s), and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the

¶51

Scheduled Tribes are not made out against the present applicants.

¶52

In view of that, he prayed for quashing of the FIR.

¶53

Per contra, learned APP for the State has taken me

¶54

through the entire statements of witnesses and submitted that as far as applicant Nos.1 and 3 are concerned, there is a specific allegation that they have abused the complainant not only in a filthy language but also on her caste. She submitted that it is not that they have uttered any sentence in a chorus but one by one words are uttered and, therefore, a specific role is attributed to applicant Nos.1 and 3.

¶55

As far as applicant Nos.4 and 5 are concerned, they

¶56

have assaulted the son of the complainant in an initial incident and they are identified during the Test Identification Parade.

.....6/-

Judgment

40 apl552.24

6

Thus, a prima facie case is made out against applicant Nos.1; 3; 4 and 5.

¶62

She submitted that as far as applicant No.2 is

¶63

concerned against whom also allegations are levelled as to abuses and, therefore, application deserves to be rejected.

¶64

After hearing both sides and perusing the entire investigation papers, statements of witnesses categorically narrated role of applicant Nos.1 and 3 as far as abuses on the caste are concerned in specific words.

¶65

As far as applicant Nos.4 and 5 are concerned, they are identified during Test Identification Parade as they have assaulted the son of the complainant. Thus, specific role is attributed to applicant Nos.1; 3; 4, and 5.

¶66

As far as application of provisions of offences under Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes is concerned, the Hon’ble Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No.2622/2024 ( Shajan

.....7/-

Judgment

40 apl552.24

7

Skaria vs. The State of Kerala and anr ) decided on 23.8.2024, “duty to determine prima facie existence of the case is cast upon the courts with a view to ensure that no unnecessary humiliation is caused to the accused. The courts should not shy away from conducting a preliminary inquiry to determine if the narration of facts in the complaint/FIR in fact discloses the essential ingredients required to constitute an offence under the Act, 1989. It is expected of the courts to apply their judicial mind to determine whether the allegations levelled in the complaint, on a plain reading, satisfy the ingredients constituting the alleged offence. Such application of judicial mind should be independent and without being influenced by the provisions figuring in the complaint/FIR. The aforesaid role of the courts assumes even more importance when a prima facie finding on the case has the effect of precluding the accused person from seeking anticipatory bail, which is an important concomitant of personal liberty of the individual”.

.....8/-

Judgment

40 apl552.24

8

It has been further held that, “all insults or

¶77

intimidation to a member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe will not amount to an offence under the Act, 1989 unless such insult or intimidation is on the ground that the victim belongs to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe”.

¶78

In view of the said observations, if allegations are taken into consideration, the alleged incident has taken place within the public view. The intention of applicants to humiliate the complainant on her caste is also apparent.

¶79

In view of that, the application to the extent of applicant No.1, 3, 4 and 5 deserves to be rejected.

¶80

Considering general statement, as far as applicant No.2 is concerned, regarding abuses by her, no other role is attributed to her and, therefore, the application to the extent of applicant No.2 deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, I proceed to pass following order:

.....9/-

Judgment

40 apl552.24

9

ORDER

(1) The criminal application is partly allowed .

¶87

(2) FIR in connection with Crime No.228/2022 registered

¶88

with non-applicant No.1 police station for offences under Sections 323 and 324 read with 34 of the IPC and under

¶89

Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities), Act, 1989 and consequent proceeding arising out of the same bearing chargesheet No.64/2022 are hereby quashed and set aside to the extent of applicant No.2 Rupali w/o Ravindra Palhade.

¶90