there was some quarrel between both sides. Even in the FIS the defacto complainant has specifically stated that on hearing the noise Nisha, Rahim and others rushed to the spot and separated the petitioner from the defacto complainant. At least one witness, who was questioned has given a statement to the effect that, when he saw the incident, the accused was standing in her room and the defacto complainant was standing outside the room. They were quarreling. The final report laid by the investigating agency also discloses that the incident happened in the presence of outsiders. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the decision reported in Swaran Singh V State (2008) 8 SCC 435 to contend that if the incident happens inside a room, it may not satisfy the ingredients required under SC & ST (POA) Act. However, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had made a clear distinction between the expressions “public place” and “in any place within the public view”. It was held in Swaran Singh's case that if the incident happens inside a building and not in public view, the ingredients of the
