ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Mr. Ghodeswar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Sonare, A.P.P. for the respondent no.1. Respondent no.2 who is informant has chosen not to put in appearance in spite of service. 2. Rule. Heard forthwith by consent of the parties. 3. By this application the applicant challenges F.I.R. No.35/2006 lodged by respondent no.2 at Police Station, Dashashar, Dhamangaon Railway under Section 3(1)(xii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) and under Sections 376 (2) (g) read with Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The challenge is to the extent of registration of crime under Section 3 (1)(xii) of the Act. 4. Mr. Ghodeswar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submitted that in the report lodged by respondent no.2 her caste is not mentioned and, therefore, registration of F.I.R. against the applicant F.I.R. for offence under Section 3(1) (xii) of the Act is not sustainable in law. In support of this submission, Mr. Ghodeswar relied upon the judgment of this Court in Manohar Martandrao Kulkarni and another Vs. State of Maharashtra and others (2005 (4) Mh.L.J.) in which the learned Single Judge of this Court has held that for registration of crime by the police under the Act it is necessary to mention the caste of the complainant and/or the accused in the report and unless the caste is mentioned, there cannot be registration of F.I.R. under the Act. The ratio laid down by this Court in Manohar Kulkarni's case (supra) is squarely applicable in the present case. 5. Mr. Sonare, learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of respondent no.1 has fairly conceded that the F.I.R. could not have been registered under Section 3(1)(xii) of the Act against the applicant. 6. In view of the above, F.I.R. No.35/2006 lodged by respondent no.2 at Police Station, Dashashar, Dhamangaon Railway for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(xii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 is quashed and set aside. However, it is made clear that the investigating agency is free to proceed with the investigation insofar as the offences under Indian Penal Code are concerned. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs.