Gujarat High Court
Gajanan Manaji Mistry vs State Of Gujarat on 1 May, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/999/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST ORDER
PASSED BY SUBORDINATE COURT) NO. 999 of 2017
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
============================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
============================================
GAJANAN MANAJI MISTRY & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
============================================
Appearance:
MR RAMNANDAN SINGH(1126) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR MB RANA(2760) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR ROHAN H. RAVAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 01/05/2026
JUDGMENT
1) By way of present revision application under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicants have sought following relief:-
"(B) Your Lordships may be pleased to call for records and proceedings Atrocity (Special) Case No.70 of 2016 and be pleased to quash and set aside impugned order dated 21.8.2017 passed by learned Special Judge, City Sessions Court No.18 (Atrocity) Ahmedabad in Atrocity (Special) Case No.70 of 2016 below Exh.6, by holding the same to be illegal and unlawful.
(C) YOUR LORDSHIPS MAY BE PLEASED TO allow the application below Ex 6 filed in Atrocity (Special) Case Page 1 of 9 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:55 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/999/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined No.70 of 2016 pending before Learned Special Judge, City Sessions Court No.18 (Atrocity) Ahmedabad.;"
2) Brief facts of the present case are that one FIR being I-
C.R.No.132 of 2015, came to be registered for the offences punishable under Sections 384, 323, 506(2), 294(a), 114, 415 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1), (3), (5), (8), (10) and (15) of The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, (which shall hereinafter be referred to as "Atrocities Act" for short) with Gujarat University Police Station, Ahmedabad. The applicants were arrested on 14.02.2016 and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed in which offences under Atrocities Act came to be deleted as the investigating agency found that no case of atrocity was made out. Thereafter, at the stage of framing of charge before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate there was objection raised by the complainant / prosecution that there are elements of Sections 3(1), 3(5), 3(8), 3(10) and 3(15) of the Atrocities Act and therefore, the matter was committed to the special Atrocity Court as envisaged under Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (which shall hereinafter be referred to as "the Code" for short). The learned City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, registered the case and numbered as Special Atrocity Case No.70 of 2016. Thereafter, on 29.12.2016 the applicants preferred the discharge application at Exhibit 6 under Page 2 of 9 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:55 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/999/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined Section 227 of the Code and prayed to be discharged as they belongs to the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Community (which shall hereinafter be referred to as "SC/ST Community" for short). Thereafter, the learned Special Judge, City Sessions Court No.18, (Atrocity), Ahmedabad, has been pleased to reject the discharge application at Exhibit 6, vide order dated 21.08.2017. Being aggrieved with and dissatisfied by the same the applicants have preferred the present revision application.
3) Learned Advocate Mr. Ramnandan Singh for the applicants, has submitted that the applicants are falsely enroped in the offence by the complainant as the applicant no.1 - husband of the applicant no.2 belongs to SC / ST community and evidence to that effect has already been placed with the charge-sheet. Further, it is alleged that so far Atrocities Act is concerned no case is made out against the applicants merely on the ground that the accused belongs to SC / ST community and his wife married with him due to this reason question does not arise to intentionally insult the scheduled caste person and no case of humiliation is made out. He has further submitted that no any obnoxious substance or allegations are made against the complainant by the applicants. He has further submitted that the allegations started from the year 2007 and continued up to 2015 Page 3 of 9 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:55 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/999/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined approx. 8 years and hence the compliant is filed belatedly. Hence, he has requested to allow the present revision application.
4) Learned APP Mr. Rohan H. Raval, for the respondent - State and learned Advocate Mr. Ramnandan Singh, for the respondent no.2 have supported the case and the judgment of both the Courts and submitted that the accused is claiming scheduled caste status of Maharashtra State and he cannot receive advantage of said certificate as alleged offence is committed in the State of Gujarat. The son of the complainant produced the FDR before the Gujarat University Police Station. There is sufficient material collected during the investigation and strong prima facie case is made out against the accused. Further, challenging the status of SC / ST Community is assailed before the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan which is pending adjudication. Hence, the applicants are not entitled to claim status of SC/ST community. They have further submitted that the applicant no.1 belongs to scheduled caste and the applicant no.2 is his wife and she is does not belongs to scheduled caste. Hence, they have requested to dismiss the present revision application.
5) The respondent no.2 - complainant has filed affidavit in reply and reiterated the allegations levelled against the accused and Page 4 of 9 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:55 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/999/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined objected that no benefit or privilege can be claimed by the accused on the basis of certificate of scheduled caste where such caste is of another State and in another State such caste is not notified in schedule and therefore the applicants cannot claim the benefits of scheduled caste and prayed for rejection of the present revision application.
6) Having heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties and going through the record it reveals that the applicants were arrested on 14.02.2016 and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed in which offences under Atrocities Act came to be deleted by the Police Sub-Inspector as he found that no case of atrocity was made out. Thereafter, at the stage of framing of charge before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate objections were raised by the complainant / prosecution that there are elements of Sections 3(i), (v), (viii), (x) and (xv) of the Atrocities Act and therefore, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate has committed the case to the Special Atrocity Court. However, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate has committed error in committing the case merely on the application for adding sections of Atrocities Act filed by the complainant whereas the charge-sheet was filed for the offences under IPC by the Police Sub-Inspector, Gujarat University Police Station, Ahmedabad City. Further, without verification or any application Page 5 of 9 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:55 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/999/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined qua further investigation the said charge-sheet was filed by the Police Sub-Inspector and the case was forwarded to the Special Court, whereas, according to Rule 7 of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995, the offence committed under the Atrocities Act shall be investigated by a police officer not below the rank of a Deputy Superintendent of Police.
7) Furthermore, the allegations of the Atrocities Act are levelled against the applicants who have submitted that the learned trial Court has committed error in rejecting the discharge application at Exhibit 6 more particularly on the ground that the applicants are also belonging to SC/ST Community and Certificate to that effect is also produced on record. Hence, offence under Atrocities Act is not made out against the accused to invoke the provision of Atrocities Act. As per Section 3 of the Atrocities Act, whoever not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe against them the offence under Atrocities Act is made out. In the present case the applicant no.1 belongs to SC/ ST Community and therefore no offence is made out against the present applicant no.1. Merely, the validity of caste certificate and status in Gujarat has been assailed by the respondent is not a ground to dismiss the discharge application, as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes has been defined under Section Page 6 of 9 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:55 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/999/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined 2(1)(C) of the Atrocities Act.
8) So far the applicant no.2 is concerned she is the wife of applicant no.1 though she does not belongs to scheduled caste but as she married with a person belongs to scheduled caste and she is residing with her husband hence question does not arise to insult or intention to insult any members of SC/ST community. Considering the intention on the part of wife as she embraced the person as a life partner who belongs to SC/ST community and even a bare perusal of the complaint it appears that the allegations are levelled against the particular community and to make reference or mention any class or SC/ST community it does not itself the insult and cannot be termed as insult of person to invoke the provisions of Atrocities Act in the public view by the person who is not belonging to SC/ST community humiliation is caused and intention of such humiliation is required to be brought on record. Even on the plain reading no offence is made out as discussed above. Hence up to that extent learned Sessions Judge has committed error in rejecting the discharge application. The object of the discharge application is to provide safeguard where prima facie fact appears to proceed against the accused is a lack of the grounds then pre-trial safeguard is required to be exercised and it is unsafe to put the accused on trial which cause undue harassment to the accused. Page 7 of 9 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:55 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/999/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined Therefore, up to that extent the applicants belong to SC/ST community is undisputed.
9) Furthermore, to invoke the provision of the Atrocities Act the victim should be a person, who belongs to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe and that the offence under the IPC is committed against such victim on the basis that such a person belongs to a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe. In absence of such ingredients, no offence under Section 3(2)(v) of the Act can be said to be committed. In this regard reference is required to be made in the case of Asmathunnisa Vs. State of A.P reported in AIR 2011 SC 1905 and Ashabai Machindra Adhagale Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. reported in (2009) 3 SCC 789, wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has concluded that the complainant is required to allege that the accused is not a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, then only on fulfilling other ingredients of the alleged offence is made out. Perusing the record it appears that the applicant nos.2 to 9 are member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe and in view of Gorige Pentaiah Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh reported in (2008) 12 SCC 531, present application deserves consideration.
10) In view of the above, no offence is made out under the Atrocities Act against the applicants and they are required to be Page 8 of 9 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:55 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/999/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined discharged only for the offences under Sections 3(i), (iii), (v),
(viii), (x) and (xv) of the Atrocities Act.
11) Accordingly, the present revision application is disposed of being partly allowed. The order dated 21.08.2017 below Exhibit 6, in Special Atrocity Case No.70 of 2016, passed by the Special Judge, City Sessions Court no.18, (Atrocity), Ahmedabad, is quashed and set aside up to above extent and the discharge application at Exhibit 6, under Section 227 of the Code, filed by the applicants is hereby partly allowed and the applicants are discharged from the offences punishable under Sections 3(i),
(iii), (v), (viii), (x) and (xv) of the Atrocities Act only.
12) Further, it is clarified that the applicants shall be put on trial under the Sections 384, 323, 294(b), 506(2), 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
13) Record and proceedings, if any, be sent back to the concerned Court forthwith.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) ANKIT JANSARI Page 9 of 9 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:55 IST 2026