Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 236 (BOM)

Shekhar v. State of Maharashtra through Police Station Karjat, Tal. Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar

2009-02-17

S.S.SHINDE

body2009
Judgment : Rule, heard furthwith. 1. This application is filed for quashing and setting aside the First Information Report in Crime No.II 08/2007 registered with Police Station Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar dated 1/6/2007 to the extent of registration of offence under section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and under section 7(1) (3) of Protection of Civil Rights Act. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant invited my attention to the contents of the complaint and contended that the caste of the accused or the statement that the accused is not of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribes is not mentioned in the complaint and on that ground itself the complaint so far as it relates under section 3(i) (x) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, deserves to 3. The learned counsel appearing for the complainant and learned A.P.P. vehemently opposed the application and submitted that prima facie case is made out against the applicant and, therefore, the application ay be rejected. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P. and learned counsel appearing for the complainant, I am of the considered view that the application deserves to be allowed. This court while granting interim relief by order dated 13th June 2007 in paragraph 3 has observed that, "From the perusal of the complaint, it can be seen that the caste of the accused has not been mentioned in the complaint. As such, the offence under the Atrocities Act could not have been registered in view of the judgment of the Division bench of this Court in ’Manohar Kulkarni Vs. State of Maharashtra’ 2005 All MR Cri. 2605. In that view of the matter, I am inclined to grant interim protection." This court considering the contents of the F.I.R. granted interim relief and interim protection in favour of the applicant. It is not necessary to make further observations in view of the above mentioned paragraph from order dated 13th June, 2007. 5. The application is allowed in terms of prayer clause ’B’ and disposed of. Rule is made absolute.