JUDGMENT Shrikant D Kulkarni, J. - Heard finally with consent of both the sides. 2. By this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicants are seeking the following substantive prayers. "C. The FIR No.24/2020 registered with Police Station, Sirsala, Dist. Beed for the offences punishable U/s. 306, 504, 34 of I.P.C. and U/s. 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 may kindly be quashed, which is at Exhibit "A". C-1 The Charge sheet filed by the Investigating Officer in Crime No.24/2020 registered with Police Station Sirsala, Dist. Beed for the offences punishable u/sec. 306, 504, 34 of I.P.C. and u/sec. 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(v) of the S.C. & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 may kindly be quashed, which is at Exhibit "G". C-2. The Criminal Case bearing Special Case No.1/2021 (The State of Maharashtra Vs. Sayyad Rahim and Others) pending on the file of Learned Special Judge i.e. Additional Sessions Judge at Majalgaon, Dist. Beed may kindly be quashed." 3. The factual scenario giving rise to this quashing application, in short, is as under: 3(a) Respondent No.2 / first informant lodged F.I.R. with Sirsala Police Station, District Beed on 22.02.2020 against the applicants. It is alleged in the F.I.R. by the first informant that his father Bansi was having agricultural land admeasuring 3 Acres from Gut No.187 situated at village Fakir Jawla. At the relevant point of time, his father was in need of money. His father Bansi had executed a sale deed of his land on 20.09.2010 in favour of applicant No.1 Sayyad Rahim for Rs.3,00,000/- as a security. His father belongs to scheduled caste. It was agreed between applicant No.1 and the father of the first informant for re-conveyance of the same land after payment of Rs.4,50,000/-. 3(b) It is alleged in the F.I.R. that applicant No.1 Sayyad Rahim refused to execute re-conveyance deed of the land in question even after payment of Rs.4,50,000/-. It is alleged that Sayyad Rahim put forth the demand of Rs.10,00,000/- to Bansi Gavali and alleged to have abused on phone with reference to his caste. On 25.05.2018, the application was submitted to the Superintendent of Police, Beed about the said episode and the application was forwarded for enquiry to Police Station Sirsala. It is alleged that Sayyad Rahim put forth the demand of Rs.10,00,000/- to Bansi Gavali and alleged to have abused on phone with reference to his caste. On 25.05.2018, the application was submitted to the Superintendent of Police, Beed about the said episode and the application was forwarded for enquiry to Police Station Sirsala. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that applicant Nos.1 to 5 from the year 2010 and before one month of lodging of F.I.R., continuously harassed to the father of the first informant and avoided to re-convey the sale deed in favour of father of the first informant. It is further alleged that the applicants have abused to the father of the first informant with reference to his caste and insulted him in a public place. They have filed complaints dated 09.02.2020 and 11.02.2020 against the applicants, but no action was taken. Due to continuous harassment at the hands of applicants, father of the first informant had given up food and water and fell ill. Due to mental torture, his father succumbed to death on 16.02.2020. According to the first informant, applicants are responsible for the death of his father. On that basis crime No.24 of 2020 came to be registered for the offences punishable under sections 306, 504 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v) of the S.C. & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 4. In the above background, the applicants are before us with a prayer for quashing of F.I.R. and consequent filing of charge-sheet registered vide Special Case No.1/2021 pending on the file of learned Special Judge at Majalgaon. 5. Heard Mr. Sudarshan Salunke, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. G.O. Wattamwar, learned A.P.P. for State / Respondent No.1 and Mr. S.Y. Shinde, learned counsel for respondent No.2 / first informant. Perused the copy of F.I.R., copy of sale deed, copy of mutation entry, copy of Exhibit 1 of R.C.S. No.97/2018 pending on the file of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Dharur, District Beed, copy of application below Exhibit 5 and order passed thereon by the Joint Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Dharur, copies of applications dated 25.05.2018 and 11.02.2020, copy of postmortem report, copy of final cause of death certificate, copies of police papers / charge-sheet and affidavit in reply filed by the first informant / respondent No.2. Submissions of learned counsel for the applicants 6. Mr. Salunke, learned counsel for the applicants vehemently submitted that the real dispute between the parties is centered around with sale deed dated 20.09.2010 executed by the father of the first informant. The father of the first informant was in need of money for household expenses and agricultural purpose and executed a sale deed of his 3 Acres of land from Gut No.187 for consideration of Rs.3,00,000/-. It was not a transaction of money lending as alleged by the first informant. It was a sale deed for lawful consideration of an amount of Rs.3,00,000/-. The name of the applicant No.1 came to be mutated in respect of 3 Acres of land after sanctioning mutation entry. Applicant No.1 is in possession of 3 Acres of the land and cultivating the same. Applicant No.1 has filed Regular Civil Suit vide R.C.S. No.97/2018 in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Dharur against the father of the first informant in view of the obstruction to his possession. The Civil Court was pleased to grant temporary injunction against the father of the first informant vide order dated 05.11.2019. 7. The first informant and his father filed various complaints to the authorities as well as police, but there was no substance in those complaints and that is why police authority did not take any action against applicant No.1. The allegations made in the F.I.R. are false and baseless. The allegations are made only with a view to put pressure on applicants to get execute re-conveyance deed. The provisions of S.C. and S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 also came to be slapped against the applicants only with a view to give colour of casteism and to seek favour from the authority. The criminal proceeding initiated by the police at the instance of first informant is nothing but abuse of court process. The civil dispute is going on between the parties, which may determine the legal rights. There is no need to continue this criminal proceeding, when it is a purely civil dispute between the parties. The criminal proceeding needs to be quashed. 8. Mr. Salunke, learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance on the following stock of citations. 1. G. Sagar Suri and another Vs. State of U.P. and others, (2000) 2 SCC 636 . 2. State of Kerala and others Vs. The criminal proceeding needs to be quashed. 8. Mr. Salunke, learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance on the following stock of citations. 1. G. Sagar Suri and another Vs. State of U.P. and others, (2000) 2 SCC 636 . 2. State of Kerala and others Vs. S. Unnikrishnan Nair and others, (2015) AIR SC 3351. 3. Netai Dutta Vs. State of W.B., (2005) AIRSCW 1326 SC . 4. Hitesh Verma Vs. State of Uttarakhand and another, (2021) CriLJ 1. 9. Mr. Salunke submitted that father of the first informant met with natural death. It was not a suicidal death. Section 306 of the I.P.C. does not attract in view of the cause of death certificate given by the Doctors. The offences lodged against the applicants under S.C. & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 are only with a view to give different colour and put pressure on applicant No.1 so that he may execute re-conveyance deed. Mr. Salunke submitted that socalled suicide note does not state anything about continuous harassment much less name of applicant No.1. He submitted that there is no prima facie case against the applicants to attract section 306 of IPC and sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v) of the S.C. & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Submissions of learned counsel for Respondent No.2 / first informant 10. Mr. Shinde, learned counsel for the first informant / respondent No.2 forcefully submitted that on the basis of first information report filed by the first informant on 22.02.2020, crime No.24/2020 came to be registered at Sirsala Police Station against the applicants for the offences punishable under sections 306, 504 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v) of the S.C. & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The investigation agency has conducted investigation in depth and found sufficient evidence against the applicants and charge-sheet came to be filed against them vide charge-sheet No.118/2020 on 30.12.2020. On that basis proceedings of Special Case No.1/2021 came to be initiated against the applicants and the same is subjudice before the learned Special Judge / Additional Sessions Judge at Majalgaon. 11. Mr. Shinde submitted that the transaction dated 20.09.2010 between applicant No.1 and father of the first informant was not a sale deed. Applicant No.1 is a private money lender. 11. Mr. Shinde submitted that the transaction dated 20.09.2010 between applicant No.1 and father of the first informant was not a sale deed. Applicant No.1 is a private money lender. It was agreed between them that after payment of hand loan amount, applicant No.1 would execute re-conveyance deed. Applicant No.1 did not stick up to his words and refused to execute re-conveyance deed. Father of the first informant filed various complaints to the authorities, but no outcome. Father of the first informant had given up food because of continuous mental torture at the hands of applicants and ultimately succumbed to death. He has also left behind a suicide note, which has strengthened the case of first informant. The first informant is not aware about the civil suit pending between the deceased and the applicants. 12. Mr. Shinde submitted that considering the above factual scenario, serious allegations are made against the applicants in the F.I.R., suicide note and other evidence is collected by the investigation agency. It is not a fit case to quash the F.I.R. and consequent proceeding of Special Case No.1/2021. Submissions of learned A.P.P. for the State 13. Mr. Wattamwar, learned A.P.P. for the State echoed the argument advanced by Mr. Shinde, learned counsel for the first informant. He submitted that it is not a fit case to invoke the provisions of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceeding. 14. We have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel for the first informant / respondent No.2. We have also gone through the copy of F.I.R., copy of the charge-sheet, copy of postmortem report, copy of final cause of death certificate, copy of suicide note and other papers with the assistance of learned counsel for the respective sides. 15. The law on quashing of first information report / criminal proceedings is well settled in view of the landmark decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and others, (1992) AIR SC 604. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has set out the categories of cases in which the inherent powers under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code can be exercised. Seven categories are laid down, wherein inherent powers under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code can be exercised by the High Court. Bhajan Lal and others, (1992) AIR SC 604. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has set out the categories of cases in which the inherent powers under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code can be exercised. Seven categories are laid down, wherein inherent powers under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code can be exercised by the High Court. The guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and others (supra) are followed in subsequent decisions even in the recent case of M/s. Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.Vs. State of Maharashtra,2021 SC 1918. 16. In case G. Sagar Suri and another Vs. State of U.P. and others (supra), it is held by the Apex Court that the jurisdiction under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has to be exercised with great care. In exercise of its jurisdiction, the High Court is not to examine the matter superficially. It is to be seen if a matter, which is essentially of a civil nature, has been given a cloak of criminal offences. Criminal proceedings are not a short cut of other remedies available in law. It is further held by the Apex Court that though the trial Court has jurisdiction to discharge the accused at any stage of the trial if he considers the charge to be groundless, but that does not mean that the accused cannot approach the High Court under section 482 of the Code or Article 227 of the Constitution to have the proceeding quashed against them when no offence has been made out against them and still why must they undergo the agony of a criminal trial. 17. Now coming back to the factual scenario of the case at hand, which plays vital role in determining the question of termination of the criminal proceeding raised before us. (i) The father of first informant has executed sale deed on 20.09.2010 in favour of first informant for a consideration amount of Rs.3,00,000/- in respect of 3 Acres of his land from Gut No.187 situated at village Fakir Jawla, District Beed. (ii) The name of applicant No.1 came to be mutated in respect of 3 Acres of land after due enquiry by the Revenue Officer. (ii) The name of applicant No.1 came to be mutated in respect of 3 Acres of land after due enquiry by the Revenue Officer. Prima facie, there is no material on record to show that the transaction in dispute was for security of loan advanced by applicant No.1 to the father of first informant for hand loan of Rs.3,00,000/-. (iii) No civil proceedings initiated by the father of the first informant when applicant No.1 first time allegedly refused to execute re-conveyance deed in the year 2014-2015 after alleged repayment of loan. (iv) The Civil Court has granted temporary injunction against the father of the first informant vide order dated 05.11.2020 on Exhibit 5 in Regular Civil Suit No.97/2018 (Sayyad Rahim Vs.Bansi Gavali). (v) The final cause of death certificate nowhere indicates that the death of father of the first informant falls into the definition of suicide. (vi) The suicide note allegedly left behind by the deceased (father of the first informant) does not reveal name of any of the applicants. The suicide note does not bear the signature of Bansi Gavali (father of the first informant) 18. The above factual scenario appearing before us is supporting to the case of the applicants. 19. For the death of father of the first informant, we may gather from the F.I.R. the following narration. 20. In the context of above allegations made in the F.I.R., it is difficult to accept, even prima facie, that death of father of the first informant falls into the definition of suicide. In the first part of the F.I.R., it is alleged that since the year 2010 onwards and before one month, continuous harassment was allegedly caused by the applicants to the father of the first informant and humiliated him, which resulted that the deceased had given up food and succumbed to death falling in the category of suicide, which is difficult to digest in the above scenario. 21. Mr. Shinde, learned counsel for the first informant / respondent No.2 invited our attention to the copies of complaints addressed to the Superintendent of Police, Beed dated 25.05.2018 and 11.02.2020. By taking help of the above said two complaints, Mr. Shinde attempted to make out a case of money lending between the applicant No.1 and father of the first informant. We are not impressed by the submissions made by Mr. By taking help of the above said two complaints, Mr. Shinde attempted to make out a case of money lending between the applicant No.1 and father of the first informant. We are not impressed by the submissions made by Mr. Shinde, learned counsel for the first informant / respondent No.2. No plausible answer or explanation is coming forth from the mouth of the first informant as to why proceeding of civil suit was not initiated for recovery of possession of the land in dispute. Mr. Shinde has also invited our attention to the case of Praveen Pradhan Vs. State of Uttaranchal and another, (2012) 9 SCC 734 and submitted that due to persistent harassment by the applicants, the father of the first informant had given up food and ultimately succumbed to death, which falls in the category of abetment of suicide. 22. We have gone through the citation of the Pravin Pradhan Vs. State of Uttaranchal and another (supra) relied upon by the Mr. Shinde, learned counsel for the first informant. In the cited case, there was persistent harassment at work-place by the appellant employer alleged as cause of suicide. Suicide note corroborated by statements of family members of deceased. In the cited case, the deceased was a qualified graduate engineer and still suffered persistent harassment and humiliation and additionally, also had to endure continuous illegal demands made by the appellant, upon non-fulfillment of which, he would be mercilessly harassed by the appellant for a prolonged period of time. Such harassment, coupled with the utterance of words to the effect driven him to commit suicide. 23. Mere refusal to execute re-conveyance deed cannot be a ground of continuous harassment. The legal remedies were available to the father of the first informant. 24. The final cause of death certificate of deceased namely Bansi Kondiba Gavali is given by the Department of Forensic Medicine, Swami Ramanand Teerth Rural Government Medical College, Ambajogai, which reads thus: "Death due to coronary artery disease with left ventricular hypertrophy with severe pulmonary edema and pneumonitis" 25. The death due to coronary artery disease speaks that the arteries supplying blood to the heart are blocked. Myocardium are disengaged causing blocks. Left ventricular of heart was hypertrophied means it was thickened. Pulmonary edema and pneumonitis are symptoms of lung disease. The death due to coronary artery disease speaks that the arteries supplying blood to the heart are blocked. Myocardium are disengaged causing blocks. Left ventricular of heart was hypertrophied means it was thickened. Pulmonary edema and pneumonitis are symptoms of lung disease. It cannot be said to be a death due to giving up food and water for a period of one month. Deceased was suffering from heart disease coupled with severe pulmonary edema and pneumonitis, which resulted into his death. It was a natural death due to above said diseases. 26. We have also gone through the suicide note allegedly left behind by the father of the first informant. It is in vernacular and reproduced as under : 27. The above said alleged suicide note of deceased does not bear the signature of father of the first informant, though he was able to make signature as appearing from the sale deed executed by him. The suicide note is completely silent about continuous harassment and insult at the hands of applicants. The alleged suicide note nowhere speaks either name of applicant No.1 or applicant Nos. 2 to 5. The suicide note itself though appears to be suspicious really does not speak about the continuous act of harassment. Even if the contents of the suicide note are accepted, it is difficult to arrive at prima facie opinion that applicants are behind the death of father of the first informant in absence of details thereof as well as their names, which are absolutely necessary. 28. In case of State of Kerala and Ors. Vs. S. Unnikrishnan Nair and Ors. (supra), it is held by the Apex Court that when the allegations against the respondents who are inferior in rank is really vague and suicide note really does not state about any continuous conduct of harassment, no prima faice case is made out against the respondents, order of the High Court for quashing F.I.R. is proper. 29. In case of Netai Dutta Apellate Vs. 29. In case of Netai Dutta Apellate Vs. State of W.B. (supra), it is held by the Apex Court that in a case of abetment of suicide when no averment in alleged suicide note that accused had caused any harm to deceased or was in any way responsible for delay in paying salary to him, no reference of any act or incidence in alleged suicide note whereby accused accused has committed any willful act or omission or intentionally aided or instigated deceased in committing act of suicide. It cannot be said that the accused had in any way instigated deceased to commit suicide or he was responsible for suicide of deceased. 30. Having regard to the legal position made clear in case of Netai Dutta Vs. State of W.B. (supra) and in case of State of Kerala and Ors. Vs. S. Unnikrishnan Nair and Ors. (supra) the contents of the alleged suicide note in this case do not in any way make out the offence against the accused for abetment of suicide as contemplated under section 306 of I.P.C. 31. So far as sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(v) of the S.C. & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 alleged against the applicants are concerned, again recitals of the F.I.R. are found to be insufficient to attract provisions of Atrocities Act. No date and time is mentioned, whether it was morning time or evening time. It can be safely said that those allegations might have levelled against the applicants in the F.I.R. only with a view to give another colour and to make the alleged incident more severe to put pressure on the applicants. 32. The basic ingredients of the offence under Section 3(1)(r) of the Act can be classified as intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe and in any place within public view. The offence under Section 3(1)(r) of the Act would indicate the ingredients of intentional insult and intimidation with an intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe. All insults or intimidations to a person will not be an offence under the Act unless such insult or intimidation is on account of victim belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. All insults or intimidations to a person will not be an offence under the Act unless such insult or intimidation is on account of victim belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. The object of the Act is to improve the socio-economic conditions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes as they are denied number of civil rights. Thus, an offence under the Act would be made out when a member of the vulnerable section of the Society is subjected to indignities, humiliations and harassment. The assertion of title over the land by either of the parties is not due to either the indignities, humiliations or harassment. Every citizen has a right to avail their remedies in accordance with law. 33. There is a dispute about the possession of the land, which is the subject matter of the civil dispute between applicant No.1 and the father of the first informant. Due to dispute, applicant No.1 is not permitting family of the first informant to enter into the disputed land in view of the Civil Court order. 34. On careful examination of the F.I.R. and a copy of the charge-sheet coupled with other papers, if the allegations made in the F.I.R. and the charge-sheet against the applicants even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in its entirety, prima facie does not constitute a cognizable offence against the applicants. The criminal proceedings seems to have been initiated by the first informant against the applicants with male fide intention to get back the disputed land. The criminal proceedings initiated at the instance of the first informant is instituted with malice and with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused / applicants and with a view to spite them due to the private and personal grudge. 35. In the exercise of powers vested in us under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, we arrived at the conclusion that allowing the criminal proceeding against the applicants to continue would be an abuse of the process of the Court and the ends of justice require that the proceeding ought to be quashed. The saving of the High Court's inherent powers, both in civil and criminal matters, is designed to achieve a salutary public purpose which is that a court proceeding ought not to be permitted to degenerate into a weapon of harassment or persecution. 36. The saving of the High Court's inherent powers, both in civil and criminal matters, is designed to achieve a salutary public purpose which is that a court proceeding ought not to be permitted to degenerate into a weapon of harassment or persecution. 36. The criminal prosecution launched at the instance of the first informant seems to be predominantly of civil dispute. It stands on a different footing. It seems to be an attempt made by the first informant to teach a lesson to the applicants by taking undue advantage of unfortunate death of his father. 37. Having regard to the above reasons, we conclude that there is no propriety to continue the criminal proceedings against the applicants in the above factual scenario. It is a fit case to quash the criminal proceeding against the applicants. 38. In the result, we proceed to pass the following order. ORDER (I) The criminal application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses "C", "C-1" and "C-2". (II) The criminal application is accordingly disposed of. (III) The observations made by this Court are confined to the extent of deciding the present criminal application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and it has not bearing on the Civil Suit pending between the parties.