Nagpur Today : Nagpur News
![]()
Nagpur: The Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court in the recent ruling quashed an FIR filed against three members of a family and one other person under Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
The First Information Report (FIR) was filed on February 5, 2019, at Police Station Tirora, Dist. Gondia, for the offence of punishable under Sections 352, 506, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(r)(s) and Section 3(2) (va) of the Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the applicants Dwarkaprasad Puranlal Jumhare (65), Kamlabai Dwarkaprasad Jumhare (62), Nirmal Dwarkaprasad Jumhare (41), and Jaysheela Jagdish Meshram (49), all residents of village Sukadi, Tehsil Tirora, District Gondia.
The FIR was filed by complainant Mamta Ramesh Gedam. In her complaint, Mamta has alleged that on 05/08/2018, the applicants quarrelled with ther on account of throwing of garbage and they hurled abuses calling her caste and used casteist words and also tried to beat her. The complainant further stated that she again came to police station on the count that since, the applicants did not gave her 3 foot way of the subject property; therefore, she lodged the aforesaid FIR against the applicants/accused 1 to 4.
During the hearing, the applicants – Jumhare family and Jaysheela Meshram submitted that the aforesaid FIR is false and frivolous and it has been filed with a vindictive attitude in order to take revenge against them and to harass them by implicating in a false case. It is further submitted that one Kamlabai Waindeshkar was willing to sale the land in question to the complainant, as the complainant has purchased half portion of land of Kamlabai Waindeshkar. But as the complainant’s husband sought time to execute and register sale deed of the remaining land in question and to pay money for the said land, therefore Kamlabai Waindeshkar executed and registered sale deed of the remaining land in question in favour of the applicant Kamlabai Jumhare as she was ready to purchase the said land and also ready to pay entire sale consideration amount to Kamlabai Waindeshkar. That due to which, the complainant and her husband got annoyed with the applicants, as they wanted to purchase the entire land of Kamlabai.
The Division Bench of Justice Z A Haq and Justice Pushpa V Ganediwala, while quashing the FIR said that they have perused the FIR. It is pertinent to note that in spite of order of this court to the prosecution that chargesheet should not be filed, the prosecution has filed the chargesheet. By the order dated 05/09/2019, explanation came to be called and today, the learned APP has filed additional affidavit on record giving the explanation. We accept the explanation as recorded in the affidavit.
The Judges further said that allegations against the applicants are that during dispute between the applicants and the non-applicant, applicants uttered words “Maharin Dhedin” which are nothing but abuse on the caste of the non-applicant No. 2. On perusal of the entire charge-sheet, we do not find any material except the statements of two chance witnesses – Hemral Hiralal Bawanthade and Hemraj Jayram Shende, and the statement of husband of the informant. The chance witnesses state that while they were passing through the road in front of house of informant, she was washing utensils in her house and that time, the witnesses overheard the abuses on her caste.
Apart from these witnesses, there is no material on record to support the case as alleged in the F.I.R. Both the statements appear to be copy paste statements and the statements were recorded on 09/02/2019 and 15/02/2019 respectively for the alleged incident of 05/08/2018. In this view of the matter, we are of the considered view that allowing the criminal proceedings to continue against the applicants would be an abuse of process of law.
For want of prima facie case against the applicants in the alleged crime and as per the ratio of the Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, we are inclined to quash the FIR and chargesheet against the applicants.
Adv A.R. Prasad represented the applicants and Adv M.K. Pathan appeared for the non-applicant/State.
HC quashes FIR filed against 3 members of family under SC/ST Act