JUDGMENT - PATIL NARESH H., J.:-Rule, returnable forthwith. By consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing. 2. The petitioners are accused in a Crime Registered at No. I-86/2003 at Police Station Karjat for offences punishable under sections 436, 427 r.w. 34 of I.P.C., section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as "the Atrocities Act"), on the basis of a complaint filed on 4-7-2003 by Vijaya Kiran Bhosale, r/o Karjat, Tq. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar. It is alleged that she along with her husband and children stay in a house at Karjat and they do labour work. The had constructed a house on a plot purchased from Santosh Mehetre. On 3-7-2003 at 10.30 a.m. all the inmates of the house had gone to Karjat Police Station. She, along with her husband and daughter, returned to their house on the same day at 3.30 p.m. At that time, they were informed that at 3.00 p.m., some unidentified persons, with ill intention, thrown away some house hold articles and had burnt some of them and caused damage. A supplementary statement of the complainant Vijaya was recorded on 22-10-2003, wherein she referred the names of the petitioners and another being instrumental for commission of the crime. Thereafter, statements of witnesses wee recorded on 22-10-2003. Investigation was completed and charge-sheet was filed on 12-11-2003 for offences punishable under sections 436, 427 r/w. 34 of I.P.C. and section 3(1)(k) of the Atrocities Act. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that no offences under section 3(1)(k) of the Atrocities Act is disclosed from the charge-sheet. 4. As regards the other offences allegedly committed under the Indian Penal Code, it is stated that no material is collected by the prosecution to involve the petitioners in commission of the said crime and whatever material is brought before the Court, is not sufficient to proceed against the accused and secure conviction of the petitioners for offences punishable under sections 436 and 427 r/w 34 of I.P.C. 5. The learned A.P.P. submitted that it will be premature to appreciate the evidence, at this stage, and it is desirable that the petitioners move, in case advised so, for seeking relief of discharge before the trial Court. Prima facie, the allegations of commission of the offences are made out against the petitioners. 6. The learned A.P.P. submitted that it will be premature to appreciate the evidence, at this stage, and it is desirable that the petitioners move, in case advised so, for seeking relief of discharge before the trial Court. Prima facie, the allegations of commission of the offences are made out against the petitioners. 6. The learned Counsel appearing for the complainant stated that an alternate, efficacious statutory remedy is available to the petitioners and no case is made out by the petitioners for invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under section 482 of Cri.P.C. 7. I have perused the charge-sheet which is annexed to the application. In the complaint filed against the petitioners, the ingredients constituting an offence under section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act are not disclosed. Even, in the supplementary statement wherein the complainant referred the names of the petitioners and another co-accused, the ingredients constituting an offence under section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act do not find place. The statements of the witnesses recorded by police, do not show that an offence under the provisions of section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act, was committed by the petitioners. This Court, in a reported judgment in the case of (Bai @ Laxmibai others v. State of Maharashtra)1, 2001 All.M.R. (Cri.) 219, has taken a view that in case the complaint does not disclose an offence punishable under section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act, the prosecution cannot be initiated against the accused persons. 8. The learned Counsel for the petitioners also prayed for quashing of the charge-sheet for offences punishable under sections 436 and 427 r.w. 34 of I.P.C. However, the learned Counsel for the petitioners states that he is not pressing the same and seeks liberty to file an application at an appropriate stage, in accordance with law, before the trial Court, for an appropriate relief. 9. Prima facie, no offence is disclosed under section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act against the petitioners from the charge-sheet filed against them. Therefore, it is a fit case where the prosecution launched against the petitioners for offence punishable under section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act requires to be quashed and set aside in exercise of powers of this Court under section 482 of Cri.P.C. 10. Therefore, it is a fit case where the prosecution launched against the petitioners for offence punishable under section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act requires to be quashed and set aside in exercise of powers of this Court under section 482 of Cri.P.C. 10. In the result, the complaint registered at Crime No. I-86/2003 at Police Station Karjat and the proceedings arising out of the said crime stand, quashed and set aside to the extent of offence punishable under section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. Petition allowed. -----