Bombay High Court
Sunil Yadavrao Mandve vs State Of Maharashtra, Through ... on 25 February, 2016
Bench: Z.A. Haq
Judgment 1 wp390.15.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 390 OF 2015
Sunil Yadavrao Mandve,
Aged about 44 years, Occu.: Business,
Resident of Plot No.1, Survey No.74/1,
Dattapur, Tahsil Dhamangaon Railway,
District : Amravati.
ig .... PETITIONER.
// VERSUS //
1. State of Maharashtra,
through Police Station Officer, Dattapur,
District : Amravati.
2. Dhanraj B. Patre,
Aged about 55 years, Occu.: Agriculturist,
3. Sanjay M. Choube,
Aged about 38 years, Occu.: Service,
4. Bansi Waghmare,
Aged about 72 years, Occu.: Service,
5. Shafi Khan Mustuga Khan,
Aged about 39 years, Occu.: Service,
The respondent No.2 to 5 are residents of
Dattapur, Dhamangaon, District : Amravati.
.... RESPONDENTS
.
___________________________________________________________________
Shri Alok Daga, Advocate for Petitioner.
Shri N.B.Jawade, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
Shri P.W.Mirza, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 to 4.
___________________________________________________________________
CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.
DATED : FEBRUARY 25, 2016.
Judgment 2 wp390.15.odt
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Heard.
2. RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith.
3. The petitioner /original complainant has approached this Court
under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order passed by
the learned Sessions Judge discharging the accused Nos. 1 to 3 and 5 from
the prosecution under Section 3(1)(v) or (xv) of the Scheduled Castes and
the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and discharging
accused No.6 from the prosecution for the offence punishable under Section
3(1)(xv) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 147, 148, 448, 427, 342 and 506 of the
Indian Penal Code.
4. The petitioner filed complaint against the accused alleging that
he was living with his family in the house of Shri Sonare as a tenant since
about seven years prior to 2003, that he purchased the house from Shri
Sonare in 2003, that the accused No.1-Dhanraj B. Patre (present respondent
No.2) threatened the complainant and his family members and asked them
to vacate the house contending that he has purchased the house from Shri
Sonare in 2003. It is alleged that between 2nd March, 2008 and 3rd March,
2008 when the complainant was not at Dattapur, Tahsil : Dhamangaon,
Judgment 3 wp390.15.odt
District : Amravati and had gone to Nagpur, the accused had came to his
house, thrown household articles and furniture and locked the complainant's
mother in the house. It is alleged that the accused insulted the complainant
by hurling abuses on his caste.
On the basis of the complaint, F.I.R. was registered,
investigation was conducted and charge-sheet came to be filed before the
learned Magistrate for the prosecution for commission of offence under
Sections 143, 147, 448, 342, 427 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and
Section 3(1)(v) and (xv) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
5. The accused filed application under Section 227 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure contending that the allegations against them do not
prima-facie make out the offence under the Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, as also under the
various provisions of the Indian Penal Code for which they are being
prosecuted. The accused prayed for discharge.
The learned Sessions Judge by the impugned order allowed the
application filed by the accused. The petitioner being aggrieved by it has filed
this writ petition.
Judgment 4 wp390.15.odt
6. After hearing the learned advocates for the petitioner and the
respondent Nos. 2 to 4 as well as learned A.P.P,. and examining the
documents filed on record of the writ petition, I find that the learned
Sessions Judge has dealt with all the relevant material on record, adverted to
all the relevant issues, considered relevant provisions of the Scheduled Castes
and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and the Indian
Penal Code and has rightly concluded that the offence punishable under
Section 3(1)(v)(xv) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is not made out against the accused Nos.
1 to 3 and 5 and the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(v)(xv) of the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989 and under Sections 147, 148, 448, 427, 342 and 506 of the Indian
Penal Code is not made out against the accused No.6.
7. The learned Sessions Judge has also considered that the
prosecution has not placed any material on record to show that Bansi
Waghmare (present respondent No.4) belongs to scheduled caste or not,
which is necessary to attract the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
The petitioner has not been able to point out any illegality or
perversity in the findings recorded by the learned Sessions Judge.
Judgment 5 wp390.15.odt
8. I see no reason to interfere with the impugned order. The
petition is dismissed. In the circumstances, the parties to bear their own
costs.
JUDGE
RRaut..
