Judgment Heard, Perused Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by mutual consent of parties. 2. Application of the provisions of Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to the case revealed through the F.I.R. (C.R. No.I-95/2010) registered with Shivajinagar Police Station, Beed is questioned in the present petition. 3. Case in question is the product of the complaint lodged by the respondent No.3 Bhausaheb Bansode, Police Sub-Inspector, Dog-Squad, Beed against his fellow Naik Police Constable working at Washim, Taluka and District Washim. Complaint dated 27/5/2010 lodged by the respondent No.3 reveals an allegation that around 21.30 Hrs. on 26/5/2010 he had received a mobile call from one Pawar (the applicant) from Mobile No.9767328666 on his Mobile No.9823152337 and the said person had used caste abusive language with reference to his caste "Mahar", a Scheduled Caste. He also alleged that, speaker of his Mobile phone was on and he was at the Kalyan Bhavan Ground in company of his colleagues -Police Constable Nisargandh, Gaikwad and Daka. 4. Mr. Surve, learned Advocate for the applicant submitted that at the material time the applicant was hospitalised and was astonished to find that the Sim Card 9767328666 was issued in his name though he had never applied for it. He further submitted that assuming the contents of the complaint to be true at its face value it would not attract the provisions of Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 as the alleged caste abusive utterances were on Mobile phone and, therefore, the intent to humiliate the respondent No.2, a member of Scheduled Caste, in a place within public view is not spelt out. 5. Mr. Qureshi, learned Advocate for respondent No.3 was not in position to counter the submissions made on behalf of the applicant as regards the applicability of Section 3(1) (x) of the said Act in the present case. However, the learned A.P.P. for the State submitted that there were statements of the colleagues, who were accompanying the respondent No.3 at the material time, showing that they could hear the caste abusive utterances made on the said Mobile phone and, therefore, the provisions of Section 3(1) (x) of the said Act were rightly invoked. 6. However, the learned A.P.P. for the State submitted that there were statements of the colleagues, who were accompanying the respondent No.3 at the material time, showing that they could hear the caste abusive utterances made on the said Mobile phone and, therefore, the provisions of Section 3(1) (x) of the said Act were rightly invoked. 6. As regards the plea of alibi, as contended by the applicant, it needs only to be observed that such plea will have to be proved in course of trial. As regards the applicability of the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, it can very well be seen that the alleged caller was making the alleged caste abusive utterances on Mobile phone. Obviously, his intentions were to restrict his utterances to the person receiving his call and none other. Statements of witnesses, Constable Nisargandh, Gaikwad and Daka reveal that after the person calling on the Mobile phone had abused the respondent No.3 and the respondent No.3 had disclosed his identity as Bansode, P.S.I., the speaker mike was turned on and not before it. There is no material to point out that there were any other person particularly the members of the public around the said place at the material time. These facts clearly demonstrate that neither there was any intent on the part of the applicant to humiliate the respondent No.3 nor was the incriminating act committed within public view. The application of provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 in the present case is, therefore, not justified and certainly its application is abuse of the process of law. The petition, therefore, must succeed. 7. The application of Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to the case revealed through the F.I.R. No.I-95/2010, registered with Shivaji Nagar Police Station, Beed is, therefore, set aside. Rule is made absolute in above terms. 8. At this stage, liberty is sought to challenge the application of Section 294 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in the present case. Criminal Application No.2455/2010 stands disposed off accordingly with liberty as is available in law.