ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. Piyush Trivedi, learned advocate for Mr. Pratik B. Barot, learned advocate appearing for the applicant. 2. By way of present application, the applicant herein is aggrieved by the impugned complaint/FIR being II-C.R. No.7 of 2017 registered with Damnagar Police Station, District : Amreli for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 504 of Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(1)(r), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and other consequential proceedings. 3. The brief facts as stated in the FIR read thus :- 3.1 An impugned FIR is lodged by respondent No.2 - original complainant stating that on the said date of incident i.e. 03.05.2017 at about 9:00 am in the morning, when respondent No.2 was present at his house, the applicant herein had visited his house so also followed by speaking of abusive language towards him and saying that though he was called yesterday, since he did not come to him, respondent No.2 then resisted to such speaking to abusive language by the applicant, in the event the applicant herein started inflicting kick and fist blows upon the stomach portion of the respondent No.2, on account of which, nephews of respondent No.2 namely Rajeshbhai and Ghanshyambhai intervened so also they rescued respondent No.2 from further beating at the hands of the applicant herein. It is a case that initially, respondent No.2 was taken to Damnagar Government Hospital for primary treatment, thereafter, it was shifted to Amreli Government Hospital for further treatment, the place at which the impugned FIR on hand came to be lodged by respondent No.2 against the applicant. 4. It is a case that initially, respondent No.2 was taken to Damnagar Government Hospital for primary treatment, thereafter, it was shifted to Amreli Government Hospital for further treatment, the place at which the impugned FIR on hand came to be lodged by respondent No.2 against the applicant. 4. Being aggrieved by the impugned FIR being IIC.R. No.7 of 2017 registered with Damnagar Police Station, District : Amreli, the applicant herein is constrained to approach this Court seeking following reliefs :- "(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to admit and allow this application; (B) Your Lordships may be pleased to quash and set aside the FIR being II-C.R. No.7 of 2017 registered with Damnagar Police Station, District : Amreli for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504 of Indian Penal Code and u/s. 3(1)(r), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and other consequential proceedings; (C) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the present petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to stay the proceedings of FIR being II-C.R. No.7 of 2017 registered with Damnagar Police Station, District : Amreli for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504 of Indian Penal Code and u/s. 3(1)(r), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and other consequential proceedings; (D) Your Lordships may be pleased to grant such other and further relief/s that may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case." 5. Mr. Piyush Trivedi, learned advocate for Mr. Pratik Barot, learned advocate appearing for the applicant submitted that the narration in the FIR with regard to the allegations against the applicant under Section 323 and 504 of Indian Penal Code would not be applicable, since there is no medical certificate on record as alleged under Section 323, though there is a reference to abusive language spoken by him to the complainant, however, Section 504 would not be attracted qua the applicant herein considering the allegation levelled against the applicant in the impugned FIR. 5.1 It is further submitted that so far as the Section 3(1)(r) and 3(2)(va) of Atrocities Act are concerned, the FIR and the allegations therein absolutely silent on the said point. 5.1 It is further submitted that so far as the Section 3(1)(r) and 3(2)(va) of Atrocities Act are concerned, the FIR and the allegations therein absolutely silent on the said point. Yet, because of amendment under the Atrocities Act especially under Section 3(2)(va) of the Act, since earlier language used under this Section is substituted now with the new set of terminology, there is perhaps invocation of Section 3(2)(va) in the said offence. 5.2 It is submitted that the respondent No.2 i.e. original complainant writes his surname 'Mevada' the applicant was never ever aware of he belonging to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes category, therefore the language under Section 3(2)(va), will have no application in the facts of the present case. Secondly, as far as language of Section 3(2)(va) is concerned, where there is a specific reference of commission of any offence specified in the schedule, an accused in such case shall be punishable with such punishment as specified under the Indian Penal code for such offences with fine, in such context, if the schedule as defined under Section 3(2)(va) and as appended to the Act is looked into, there is a reference of offence under Section 323 of Indian Penal Code under the said Schedule and that the schedule is silent for the offence under Section 504 of Indian Penal Code. 5.3 It is submitted that the allegation as levelled against the applicant herein in the impugned FIR would not be applicable against the applicant herein. It is further submitted that Section 3(1)(r) is concerned with the language of such section is clear and unambiguous which connotes a requirement of an intentional insult or intimidation with intent to humiliate a member of a Schedule Caste or Scheduled Tribes in any place within "public view". 5.4 For the aforesaid reasons, there is no reference of incident occurred in public view for which it could be within public purview and therefore, the FIR impugned is required to be quashed. 6. Ms. Vrunda C. Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent - State has placed on record a report dated 25.11.2022 and the said report is taken on record. Placing reliance on the same, Ms. Vrunda C. Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent - State submitted that no interference is called for in the impugned order. 7. Having heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties. Placing reliance on the same, Ms. Vrunda C. Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent - State submitted that no interference is called for in the impugned order. 7. Having heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties. POSITION OF LAW :- 8. At this stage, it is apposite to refer to the law as laid down by this Court in the case of Diren Prafulbhai Shah Versus State of Gujarat and Another in Misc. Criminal Application No. 9976 of 2015 dated 28.01.2016, para 28 reads thus :- "28. The plain reading of the F.I.R. filed by the first informant undoubtedly prima facie discloses various accusations against the first informant by the applicant in the name of the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes. It also prima facie discloses abuses having been uttered by the applicant and addressed to the first informant in the presence of the wife of the first informant on the ground of the first informant being a member of the Schedule Caste. However, as rightly submitted by the learned advocate for the applicant, the F.I.R. nowhere discloses those accusations having been made in a place within the “public view”. As explained by me above, the expression “within public view” has specific meaning and in order to attract the provisions of law under Section-3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act, the acts amounting to insult or humiliation to the member of Schedule Castes or Schedule Tribes should be visible and audible to the public. Otherwise, it would not amount to an offence under the said provision of law. Considering the same and also the allegations in the F.I.R which relate to the acts by the applicant in the closed cabin of the applicant and in the absence of any stranger, can hardly be said to be accusations by the applicant to the first informant “within the public view”. On this count itself, the applicant is justified in contending that there was no case for recording the F.I.R. under the provisions of law comprised under Section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act. 9. On this count itself, the applicant is justified in contending that there was no case for recording the F.I.R. under the provisions of law comprised under Section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act. 9. It is also apposite to refer to the law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Gorige Pentaiah Versus State of Andhra Pradesh and Others reported in (2008) 12 SCC 531 : 2008 AIR SCW 6901 dated 20.08.2008, para 8 reads thus :- "In the instant case, the allegation of respondent No.3 in the entire complaint is that on 27.5.2004, the appellant abused them with the name of their caste. According to the basic ingredients of Section 3(1)(x) of the Act, the complainant ought to have alleged that the accused-appellant was not a member of the Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe and he (respondent No. 3) was intentionally insulted or intimidated by the accused with intent to humiliate in a place within public view. In the entire complaint, nowhere it is mentioned that the accused-appellant was not a member of the Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe and he intentionally insulted or intimidated with intent to humiliate respondent No. 3 in a place within public view. When the basic ingredients of the offence are missing in the complaint, then permitting such a complaint to continue and to compel the appellant to face the rigmarole of the criminal trial would be totally unjustified leading to abuse of process of law." 10. Having heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, it is apposite to produced the impugned FIR being II-C.R. No.7 of 2017 registered with Damnagar Police Station, District : Amreli and relevant paragraph reads thus : " xxx xxx xxx xxx I declare and dictate the facts of my complaint in person from the bed No.01 of the ward No.l9 of the Amreli Civil Hospital that, I reside at the aforesaid address with my family and earn livelihood for me and my family by doing agricultural labor work. I have taken farm of Bhupatbhai Vallabhbhai Rabadiya on sharing basis. Today, on 03/05/2017, at around nine o'clock in the morning, while I was at my house, this Bhupatbhai came to my house and started hurling abusive words to me saying that, " I asked you to come yesterday, why did you not come. I have taken farm of Bhupatbhai Vallabhbhai Rabadiya on sharing basis. Today, on 03/05/2017, at around nine o'clock in the morning, while I was at my house, this Bhupatbhai came to my house and started hurling abusive words to me saying that, " I asked you to come yesterday, why did you not come. As I asked him not to hurl abusive words, he started inflicting blows at my stomach area indiscriminately and started to inflict kick and fist blows. At this time, my nephew Rajeshbhai and Ghanshyambhai came and saved me from sustaining more beating. Thereafter, this Rajeshbhai took me to Damnagar Government Hospital for treatment on a motor-cycle. After I got the first aid there, my nephew Rajesh has brought me to Amreli Government Hospital for further treatment. Currently, my treatment is going on and I am completely conscious. It is my complaint against this Bhupatbhai Vallabhhbai Radadiya for legal investigation. Above mentioned complaint is true and correct as per my dictation and the same has been read to me. I have put my signature below." 11. Section 3(1)(r), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 read thus :- "3(1)(r) :- intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in any place within public view; 3(2)(va) :- commits any offence specified in the Schedule, against a person or property, knowing that such person is a member of Scheduled Caste or a Scheculed Tribe or such property belongs to such member, shall be punishable with such punishment as specified under the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) for such offences and shall also be liable to fine." 12. From the bare reading of the impugned FIR and position of law as referred above, no words which would humiliate could be said to have been uttered by the applicant/accused herein to invoke the provisions of Atrocities Act as referred above. The alleged words also cannot be said to have been uttered in public view. Further, there is no reference of incident to have occurred in public view for which it could be within "public purview" and therefore, the FIR impugned is required to be quashed. The ingredients germane to invoke the provisions of Atrocities Act are absent in the impugned FIR. 13. Further, there is no reference of incident to have occurred in public view for which it could be within "public purview" and therefore, the FIR impugned is required to be quashed. The ingredients germane to invoke the provisions of Atrocities Act are absent in the impugned FIR. 13. For the aforesaid reasons, considering the position of law and facts of the present case, So far as the provisions of Indian Penal Code are invoked against the applicant, the complaint may continue for it is not possible; summarily decide the allegations under Section 323, 504 of the Indian Penal Code regarding inflicting blow and kicks to the complainant. 14. In view of above, the present application stands allowed in part. The impugned complaint/FIR being II-C.R. No.7 of 2017 registered with Damnagar Police Station, District : Amreli is quashed qua the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(r), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. However, the same is directed to continue qua under Sections 323, 504 of Indian Penal Code. It is however kept open for the applicant accused herein to avail legal remedy qua provisions of Indian Penal Code in accordance with law. 15. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.