Judgment 1. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 24.11.2003 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Jhanjharpur in C.P.No. 365 of 2003, T.R.No. 1362 of 2004 by which the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance under sections 323 and 342 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 3/4 of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short the Act) and summons have been issued against them. 2. It appears that on the alleged date of the occurrence i.e. 10.6.2003 the complainant asked for his payment as his daughter was got to be married and on which the petitioner no.1 became infuriated and called other accused persons to assault the complainant in order to teach a lesson. It has been alleged that all the accused persons assaulted the complainant and took thumb impression from him on a plain paper and also snatched the watch and Rs. 450/- in-cash. 3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that not a single independent witness of Tardina Village was examined to support the case of the complainant. It has been further submitted that there are vital contradiction in the complaint case and in the statement of the witnesses. It has been further submitted that the learned Magistrate taking cognizance has not applied his judicial mind. It has been further submitted that the allegation levelled against the petitioners under the provision of the Act has not been supported by the witnesses. 4. Perused the impugned order and also the complaint petition. 5. According to Section 3(x) of the Act, whoever, not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in any place within public view commits an offence of atrocities over the schedules caste or scheduled tribes. For this atrocities over the scheduled caste or scheduled tribes according to the Act there is a provision of punishment for rigorous imprisonment for not less than six months but which may extend upto rigorous imprisonment for five years and also fine. As such it is apparent that to constitute an offence the insults or intimidates must have taken place in public view. As such it is apparent that to constitute an offence the insults or intimidates must have taken place in public view. However, in this case from perusal of the complaint petition it appears that the occurrence took place in the court yard of accused which was surrounded by the room of the accused persons and it was not in public view. As such the case under Sections 3/4 of the Act is not made out and cognizance taken against the petitioners under the aforesaid sections of the Act is bad and not sustainable in the eye of law. 6. Accordingly, cognizance taken under Sections 3/4 of the Act is hereby quashed. However, the case under section 323 and 342 of the Indian Penal Code shall proceed against the petitioners in accordance with law. 7. This application is partly allowed.