JUDGMENT 1. - By this criminal misc. petition, a challenge is made to the order dated 13th October, 2003 taking cognizance of offence against the petitioner under Section 4 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short "Act of 1989") and Section 504 of IPC. 2. Learned counsel submits that cognizance of offence has been taken without considering the allegation for commissioning of offence under those provisions. It is not that cognizance has been taken under Section 3 of the Act of 1989 but is under Section 4 of the Act of 1989 regarding neglect of duties, in performance under the said Act. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, has opposed the petition. 4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel and find that cognizance of offence has been taken for offence under Section 4 of the Act of 1989 and Section 504 of IPC. Both the provisions are quoted hereunder for ready reference : "Section 4. Punishment for neglect of duties:- whoever, being a public servant but not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, willfully neglects his duties required to be performed by him under this Act, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to one year." "504. Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace.- Whoever intentionally insults, and thereby gives provocation to any person, intending or knowing it to be likely that such provocation will cause him to break the public peace, or to commit any other offence, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both." 5. So far as Section 4 of the Act of 1989 is concerned, it is regarding willful neglect of duties required to be performed under this Act. If the allegations against the petitioner are considered, it is not in regard to neglect of duties under the Act of 1989. Section 504 of IPC applies when there is an intentional insult causing provocation to person, which may break the public peace or to commit any offence. If the allegations against the petitioner are considered, it is not in regard to neglect of duties under the Act of 1989. Section 504 of IPC applies when there is an intentional insult causing provocation to person, which may break the public peace or to commit any offence. The allegations against the petitioner is regarding insult but it did not result in provocation causing break of public peace, thus even offence under Section 504 of IPC is not made out on the facts of this case. The Court below has ignored the aforesaid aspect while taking cognizance of offence under Section 4 of the Act of 1989 and Section 504 of IPC. 6. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 13th October, 2003 is quashed and the criminal proceedings against the petitioner are dropped. 7. This criminal misc. petition is allowed with the aforesaid.Petition allowed. *******