JUDGMENT : Anil Kumar Choudhary, J. I.A. No.8652 of 2025 2. Heard the parties. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this interlocutory application has been filed with a prayer to permit the petitioner to carry out the amendment as proposed in the prayer portion as well as in the main petition to the extent and the manner stated in this interlocutory application. It is next submitted that after institution of the case, the informant realised that the petitioner has no role in the occurrence, therefore, the petitioner ought not to have been prosecuted; consequently, a joint compromise petition has been filed before this Court for quashing the entire criminal proceeding and the same is required to be incorporated in the main petition by making the additional prayer as well as proposed in para-6 and 7 of this interlocutory application. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the opposite party No.6 have no objection to the prayer of the petitioner. 5. Considering the aforesaid facts, the prayer to amend the instant Criminal Miscellaneous Petition by incorporating the amendment as proposed in this interlocutory application is allowed. 6. Petitioner is directed to file a consolidated Criminal Miscellaneous Petition incorporating the amendment, as proposed in this interlocutory application as allowed by this order today. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner files the consolidated Criminal Miscellaneous Petition incorporating the amendment as allowed by this order today. 8. Keep the same in the record. 9. This Interlocutory Application is disposed of accordingly. Cr.M.P. (Filing) No.13301 of 2025 1. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is at the stage of hearing on the maintainability of the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition as in this petition the prayer invoking Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 05.03.2020 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-VII-cum- Special Judge, Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes Act Cases, Ranchi in connection with Bundu P.S. Case No.43 of 2016 has been made but prayer has also been made to quash the charge-sheet dated 27.04.2018 and the order taking cognizance dated 05.03.2020, by the said Special Judge against the petitioner passed in the said case. The Stamp Reporter has pointed out an objection that as in view of Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, there is a provision for appeal, therefore, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is not maintainable. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not challenging the order dated 05.03.2020 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-VII-cum-Special Judge, Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes Act Cases, Ranchi on its merit rather the petitioner seeks quashing of inter alia the said order; on the ground of compromise between the parties and in view of the subsequent development by which the informant later on came to know that the petitioner is innocent and he has erroneously been arrayed as an accused in this case and accordingly no offence punishable under the penal provisions of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is made out against the petitioner; hence, continuation of this criminal proceeding against the petitioner will amount to abuse of process of law and on such ground, the said order dated 05.03.2020 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-VII-cum-Special Judge, Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes Act Cases, Ranchi be quashed and set aside by this Court in exercise of its power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or the pari materia provisions contained in Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 3. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Ramawatar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in (2022) 13 SCC 635 , para-17 of which reads as under:- “17. On the other hand, where it appears to the Court that the offence in question, although covered under the SC/ST Act, is primarily private or civil in nature, or where the alleged offence has not been committed on account of the caste of the victim, or where the continuation of the legal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law, the Court can exercise its powers to quash the proceedings. On similar lines, when considering a prayer for quashing on the basis of a compromise/settlement, if the Court is satisfied that the underlying objective of the Act would not be contravened or diminished even if the felony in question goes unpunished, the mere fact that the offence is covered under a “special statute” would not refrain this Court or the High Court, from exercising their respective powers under Article 142 of the Constitution or Section 482CrPC.” (Emphasis supplied) and submits that said power under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 cannot be exercised by a court in an Appeal under Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 4. Considering the facts of the case as mentioned above, the office note dated 28.06.2025 regarding maintainability of the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition as pointed out by the Stamp Reporter is over ruled. 5. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the prayer as already indicated above in the foregoing paragraph of this judgment. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the opposite party No.6 jointly draw attention of this Court towards I.A. No.7939 of 2025 which is supported by the separate affidavits of the petitioner as well as the opposite party No.6, who has wrongly been described as opposite party No.2 which is kept at page No.9 of this interlocutory application and submit that therein it has categorically been mentioned that due to intervention of common friends and well wishers of the parties, the parties have decided to amicably settle their dispute between them and both the parties have compromised the matter. It is next jointly submitted that the present case arises out of some misunderstandings between the parties and upon the settlement, good sense has been prevailed between them. It is next jointly submitted that the present case arises out of some misunderstandings between the parties and upon the settlement, good sense has been prevailed between them. It is then submitted that though the FIR was registered for the offence punishable under Section 3 02, 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE as well as Section 3 , 4 of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 but after submission of charge-sheet, cognizance has been taken of the offences punishable under Section 3 04, 323, 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and Section 3 (1)(viii) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act as well as Section 23 of Juvenile Justice Act. It is then submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and the allegation against the petitioner is that, at the relevant time, the petitioner was posted in the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police as Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Bundu and there is no direct allegation against the petitioner of committing any offence but the only allegation against the petitioner is that he was aware that the deceased was in custody of Officer-in-charge of Dashamfall Police Station. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, drawing attention of this Court to page No.79 which is a part of Annexure-7, that therein the Crime Investigation Department (CID) after enquiry made in the case, the Superintendent of Police, Crime Investigation Department (CID), Ranchi has opined in the enquiry-cum-progress report that as the petitioner was not held guilty as per the enquiry conducted by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi; which has also been submitted before this Court by way of affidavit as well as sent to the National Human Rights Commission, the petitioner ought not have been arrayed as an accused in this case. Hence, it is submitted that in view of the settlement between the parties, the chance of conviction of the petitioner is remote and bleak and continuation of the criminal proceeding will amount to abuse of process of law. It is then submitted that the prayer as prayed for in this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition be allowed. 7. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State has no objection to the prayer as prayed for in this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition. 8. It is then submitted that the prayer as prayed for in this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition be allowed. 7. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State has no objection to the prayer as prayed for in this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition. 8. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that it is a settled principle of law as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Ramawatar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (supra) that High Court in exercise of its power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure; the pari materia provision of which is in Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, can quash a proceeding where the alleged offence has not been committed on account of the case of the victim or where the continuation of the legal proceeding would be an abuse of process of law. 9. Considering the facts of the case as stated by the petitioner in para-23A of this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition that the informant has realized that the petitioner has no role in the alleged occurrence which has been corroborate by the Superintendent of Police, Crime Investigation Department (CID), Ranchi and in view of the compromise entered into between the parties, this Court is of the considered view that continuation of the criminal proceeding against the petitioner will amount to abuse of process of law. Hence, this is a fit case where the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 05.03.2020 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-VII-cum-Special Judge, Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes Act Cases, Ranchi in connection with Bundu P.S. Case No.43 of 2016 and also the charge-sheet dated 27.04.2018 passed in the said case be quashed and set aside qua the petitioner only. 10. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 05.03.2020 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-VII-cum- Special Judge, Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes Act Cases, Ranchi in connection with Bundu P.S. Case No.43 of 2016 and also the charge-sheet dated 27.04.2018 passed in the said case is quashed and set aside qua the petitioner only. 11. In view of disposal of this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, I.A. No.7939 of 2025 is disposed of accordingly. 12. In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is allowed.