Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 126 (HP)

Hira Mani v. Thakur Das Sharma

2021-03-09

SANDEEP SHARMA

body2021
JUDGMENT : SANDEEP SHARMA, J. 1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 18.9.2012, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., in complaint No.167/3 of 2010, whereby complaint under Section 3(viii) and (ix) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘Act’), having been filed by the petitioner Hira Mani (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) came to be dismissed, complainant has approached this Court in the instant Revision Petition filed under Section 397 read with section 401 of Cr.P.C., praying therein to convict the respondent/accused after setting aside the aforesaid order of dismissal passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla, H.P. 2. Having heard learned counsel representing the parties and perused the material available on record vis-à-vis reasoning assigned by the court below while dismissing the complaint filed by the complainant under Section 3(viii) and (ix) of the Act, this Court finds no illegality and infirmity in the impugned order and as such, no interference is called for. 3. Record reveals that the complainant filed a complaint against the respondent/accused, alleging therein that the respondent /accused made a false complaint against him to the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Himachal Pradesh, on the basis of which, department ordered his as well as his wife transfer from District Shimla to Tissa, District Chamba, H.P. Complainant alleged that accused, who is ‘Brahmin’ by caste is inimical towards him and in past also had been committing atrocities against him. He alleged that on 8.5.2007, accused committed caste based atrocities against him at his native village and in this regard, matter was reported to police Station, Karsog, District Mandi, H.P. On the basis of aforesaid complaint, formal FIR was instituted against the accused under section 3(x) of the Act. Though, police after completion of the investigation filed the challan in the competent court of law, but before proceedings could be taken to its logical end, parties entered into compromise, wherein allegedly accused admitted his guilt. Orders passed by the Hon’ble Chief Minister transferring the petitioner and his wife from Shimla to Tissa was laid challenge before the erstwhile Tribunal and same were stayed. Orders passed by the Hon’ble Chief Minister transferring the petitioner and his wife from Shimla to Tissa was laid challenge before the erstwhile Tribunal and same were stayed. However, after passing of stay orders by Tribunal below allegedly accused again made complaint to Hon’ble Chief Minister Himachal Pradesh during his visit to Karsog on 14.8.2010, requesting therein to transfer the complainant as well as his wife to Chamba or Una. As per the complainant, Hon’ble Chief Minister taking cognizance of the false complaint filed by the accused, ordered his as well as his wife transfer to District Kangra. 4. Though, record reveals that at first instance accused with a view to address his grievance moved written complaint to Superintendent of Police, Shimla, which was further sent the same to Superintendent of Police, Karsog for investigation, but since police after having conducted the investigation opined that no case is made out against the accused, complainant preferred the complaint under the aforesaid provisions of law in the competent court of law. 5. Careful perusal of evidence led on record by the complainant itself suggests that he was unable to prove on record that he as well as his wife was transferred on the written complaint made by the accused, rather evidence available on record clearly reveals that the petitioner as well as his wife were transferred on administrative grounds. Court below after having carefully scanned the evidence adduced on record by the respective parties has rightly recorded that there is nothing in Ex. CW3/C, CW3/D and CW3/G on the basis of which, it can be inferred that representations were made by the accused on caste consideration, rather perusal of Ex.CW4/B-1, Ex. CW4/B-2 and Ex. CW4/B-3, clearly reveal that representations referred to above were made by accused on account of political rivalry interse him and the complainant. Otherwise also, Section 3(viii) and (x) of the Act, talks about the institution of false, malicious or vexatious suit or criminal or other legal proceedings against a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe. Apart from above, person belonging to Scheduled Caste can lodge a complaint against the member of higher caste in case it is proved that member of high caste intentionally insulted or intimated the member of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes with intent to humiliate the person belonging from Scheduled Caste category. 6. Apart from above, person belonging to Scheduled Caste can lodge a complaint against the member of higher caste in case it is proved that member of high caste intentionally insulted or intimated the member of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes with intent to humiliate the person belonging from Scheduled Caste category. 6. Evidence adduced on record by the complainant nowhere suggest that at any point of time accused instituted false malicious and vexatious or criminal proceedings against the accused, rather he filed representation to the Hon’ble Chief Minister, seeking transfer of the petitioner from one District to another District. Careful perusal of representation on the basis of which, petitioner and his wife came to be transferred nowhere reveals that representation was made on caste consideration and as such, order passed by the court below dismissing the complaint filed by the complainant cannot be faulted with. 7. Consequently, in view of the detailed discussion made hereinabove, this Court finds no merit in the instant petition and accordingly, same is dismissed alongwith pending applications, if any.