JUDGMENT 1. Rule. Heard finally with consent of the parties. 2. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the F.I.R. registered by the Police under Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 3. It is alleged that on the date of incident one Gajanan Nimbolkar had gone to his field. He came to know that Chandurkar & Co. is quarrelling at his house. On his way home, one Assalsing Tarasingh and Sanjay Zalte met him. They said to him that he should not go home because Chandurkar and Company is standing there and they are about to assault him. The complainant therefore did not go home. He, however, went to neighbour's house and was watching what was going on infront of his house. It is alleged that the present applicants were standing outside along with 20 to 25 people who belonged to Kunbi caste were abusing his wife. They were abusing the complainant in the name of his caste. The wife of the complainant, therefore, fell unconscious. They were also saying to wife of the complainant to take the complainant out of the house so that they can kill him. The complainant then lodged a report with the police. 4. The Police have registered the offence under Section 3 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act along with other Sections of the Indian Penal Code. The applicants seek to quash this F.I.R. registered by the Police. 5. The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the caste of the complainant is not mentioned in the complaint as well that of the applicants/accused. 6. After having gone through the complaint, it is apparent that the caste of the present applicants is mentioned as Kunbi. It is not disputed that the caste Kunbi does not fall in the category of Scheduled Caste. It was contended that the caste of the present applicants is not mentioned in the body of the complaint. The learned counsel relied on the decision of this court reported in 2005(4) Mh.L.J.588 (Manohar Kulkarni ..vs.. State of Maharashtra) . It is not disputed that the caste Kunbi does not fall in the category of Scheduled Caste. It was contended that the caste of the present applicants is not mentioned in the body of the complaint. The learned counsel relied on the decision of this court reported in 2005(4) Mh.L.J.588 (Manohar Kulkarni ..vs.. State of Maharashtra) . It is no doubt observed by this court in the case of Manohar Kulkarni that where the caste of the applicant and the non-applicant is not mentioned in the F.I.R., the F.I.R. should be quashed and any proceedings taken up on such F.I.R. should also be quashed. The learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that in this matter the F.I.R. was registered by the Police only upon ascertaining the caste of the complainant. He submitted that, therefore, registration of the F.I.R. was not improper. It has been held by this court in the case reported in 2006(6) Mh.L.J.209 (Bhalchandra Shelke and other ..vs.. State of Maharashtra) that where after the report is lodged, the complainant provides an information as to his own caste and that of the accused, the police could register the offence. 7. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has placed before me a case diary showing that a further statement of the complainant was recorded by the Police on the same day on which the F.I.R. is lodged with the Police. In the said statement the complainant has clearly stated that he belongs to Chambhar caste. As far as caste of the accused is concerned, it is already mentioned in F.I.R. and admittedly his caste does not fall in Scheduled Caste. It is also not disputed that Chambhar is the caste which does fall in the category of Schedule Caste. In view of latest decision of this court in Bhalchandra's case (supra), the Police did not commit wrong in registering the F.I.R. The F.I.R. as lodged in this particular case therefore, cannot be quashed. The application under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure is, therefore, dismissed. Application dismissed