Gujarat High Court
Bhupendrakumar Kantilal Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 7 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/91/2014 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 91 of 2014
==========================================================
BHUPENDRAKUMAR KANTILAL PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PANKAJ S CHAUDHARY(3269) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR N R DESAI(6504) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR P P MAJMUDAR(5284) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR. CHINTAN DAVE, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 07/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Hriday Buch with learned advocate Mr. Pankaj S. Chaudhary for the petitioner, learned advocate Mr. P.P. Majmudar for the respondent No.2 and learned APP Mr. Chintan Dave for the respondent-State.
2. By way of the present petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, "the Cr.P.C."), the petitioners seek to quash the impugned FIR being II. Cr. No.3113 of 2013 registered at Palanpur City West Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 323, 504 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
BRIEF FACTS:-
3. The petitioner was serving as the District Education Officer at Banaskantha, Palanpur on 21.06.2010. During his tenure, Page 1 of 8 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Tue Jul 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 08 23:30:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/91/2014 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025 undefined disciplinary proceedings were initiated against one Shree Tusharbhai Rabari, a teacher at the primary school of the informant's village. Pursuant to permission sought by the petitioner through a letter dated 27.07.2010, the Deputy Director of Primary Education sanctioned the teacher's suspension by order dated 02.08.2010. Consequently, the teacher was suspended with effect from 19.01.2009 and posted at Danta. Thereafter, departmental charges were framed and served on 03.03.2011. Upon reappointment, the said teacher was posted at Gangva Primary School in Danta Taluka by order dated 02.08.2011, which was later confirmed on 27.01.2012. The disciplinary proceedings remained pending due to non-cooperation of the delinquent teacher, as noted in the communication dated 20.02.2013 from the Inquiry Officer. Meanwhile, the petitioner, vide order dated 10.07.2013, declined to permit the transfer of the teacher owing to the pending departmental inquiry.
3.1. On the very same date, i.e., 10.07.2013, the impugned F.I.R came to be lodged against the petitioner by the informant alleging offences under Sections 323, 504, and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The petitioner submits that the F.I.R has been filed at the behest of the said teacher with a mala fide intention to harass and pressurize him, owing to personal and departmental animosity. It is further contended that the alleged incident took place in the petitioner's office and thus does not satisfy the statutory requirement of being in "public view" under the SC/ST Act. The petitioner has, therefore, approached this Court with a prayer to quash the impugned F.I.R on the ground that it is actuated by mala fides and falls foul of the Page 2 of 8 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Tue Jul 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 08 23:30:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/91/2014 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025 undefined legal bar contained in Section 22 of the Atrocities Act.
SUBMISSION OF THE PETITIONER:-
4. Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that a bare perusal of the impugned F.I.R would reveal that the allegations are vague, general, and bereft of specific particulars so as to attract the ingredients of Sections 323, 504, and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code. It is contended that the alleged incident is said to have occurred in the official chamber of the petitioner, and there is no mention of any overt act or specific injury caused to the informant. As regards Section 323, there is no medical certificate or prima facie material suggesting any physical assault or resultant hurt. With respect to Section 504, it is submitted that no intentional insult has been attributed which could provoke a breach of peace. As for Section 506(2), the F.I.R does not disclose any specific threat that was of such a nature as to cause alarm or fear to the complainant, which is a necessary ingredient for invoking the offence of criminal intimidation.
4.1. Insofar as the allegation under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is concerned, learned advocate submits that the F.I.R lacks any specific averment to show that the alleged utterances, even if assumed to be true, were made "in public view", which is a sine qua non for invoking Section 3(1)(x) (as it stood prior to amendment). It is submitted that the alleged incident occurred within the confines of the petitioner's office, which does not qualify as a "public place" or "in public view" as interpreted by various High Courts.
Page 3 of 8 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Tue Jul 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 08 23:30:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/91/2014 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025 undefined
4.2. Further, it is contended that the filing of the F.I.R is actuated by mala fides and is a clear counterblast to the disciplinary proceedings initiated by the petitioner against a teacher of the same village. It is urged that permitting such prosecution to continue would amount to gross abuse of the process of law, and therefore, the F.I.R deserves to be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC.
SUBMISSION OF THE RESPONDENTS:-
4. Learned advocate for the respondent has vehemently opposed the petition and submitted that the allegations levelled in the F.I.R are clear and specific, disclosing the commission of cognizable offences under Sections 323, 504, and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code as well as under the relevant provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
It is submitted that the contents of the F.I.R, when taken at face value and accepted in their entirety, clearly make out a prima facie case against the petitioner.
4.1. It is further contended that the argument regarding the absence of medical evidence at the initial stage of the proceedings is misconceived, inasmuch as the presence or absence of injury is a matter of evidence to be appreciated at the stage of trial and not during the quashing proceedings. With respect to the invocation of Section 504, it is submitted that the petitioner, being a public servant and holding an influential post, had abused his position and intentionally insulted the complainant in a manner which was derogatory and humiliating, giving rise to a reasonable apprehension of breach of public peace. Regarding Section 506(2), it is submitted that the threats extended were serious in nature, Page 4 of 8 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Tue Jul 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 08 23:30:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/91/2014 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025 undefined intended to create fear in the mind of the complainant, and thus fulfill the essential ingredients of criminal intimidation.
4.2. In relation to the offence under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, learned counsel submits that the caste of the complainant was indeed referred to in a derogatory manner, with the specific intent to humiliate and insult the complainant on the ground of his caste. It is submitted that whether the alleged utterances were made "in public view" or not is a matter of trial, requiring factual adjudication. At this stage, the truthfulness or otherwise of the allegations cannot be gone into.
4.3. It is also submitted that the petitioner's assertion that the F.I.R has been lodged with mala fide intention is a disputed factual issue, and such a claim cannot form the sole basis for quashing the criminal proceedings at the threshold. The settled legal position is that if the F.I.R discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, the same should not be quashed in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC. Accordingly, it is prayed that the petition deserves to be dismissed in limine.
5. Learned APP joining the argument of learned advocate for the respondent, prayed to dismiss the present petition.
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS OF THE COURT:-
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record. The contents of the FIR are vague and bereft of particulars necessary to constitute offences under Sections 323, Page 5 of 8 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Tue Jul 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 08 23:30:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/91/2014 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025 undefined 504, or 506(2) IPC. The absence of medical evidence further weakens the claim under Section 323. No actionable threat or insult likely to incite breach of peace is disclosed so as to attract Sections 504 or 506(2).
As regards the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act, the FIR neither discloses the alleged insult being made in a place within public view nor establishes any intent to humiliate the complainant on account of caste. It is well settled that the requirement of "public view" is mandatory and failure to meet this threshold vitiates invocation of the provision.
6.1. The timing of the FIR, i.e., being filed on the very date the petitioner denied transfer benefits to the teacher under departmental inquiry, also supports the contention that the criminal law has been set in motion maliciously and with ulterior motives.
6.2. It would be apposite to refer the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, wherein, in Paragraph 102, it is held as under:
"102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Ch. XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Art. 226 or the inherent powers under sec. 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive Page 6 of 8 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Tue Jul 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 08 23:30:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/91/2014 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025 undefined list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.
(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under sec. 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of sec. 155(2) of the Code.
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a noncognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under sec. 155(2) of the Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."
6.3. In view of the foregoing, and in exercise of the inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, the Court is of the considered Page 7 of 8 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Tue Jul 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 08 23:30:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/91/2014 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025 undefined opinion that allowing the prosecution to continue would be a clear abuse of the process of law and a travesty of justice.
ORDER:-
7. Accordingly, the present petition deserves to be allowed, and it is accordingly ALLOWED. The FIR being II. Cr. No.3113 of 2013 registered at Palanpur City West Police Station along with all subsequent proceedings arising from it, is hereby quashed and set aside qua the petitioners herein. Rule is made Absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(J. C. DOSHI,J) MANISH MISHRA Page 8 of 8 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Tue Jul 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 08 23:30:26 IST 2025