Bombay High Court
Purushottam S/O. Vitthalrao ... vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. P.S.O., ... on 21 January, 2021
Bench: Z.A. Haq, Amit B. Borkar
29 apl 989.18.jud.odt
1/5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.989 OF 2018
1. Purushottam s/o Vitthalrao Palekar,
Aged about 52 years, Occ-Head
Master, R/o Ramnagar, Vidharbha
Housing Society, Chandrapur ....APPLICANT
// VERSUS //
1. State of Maharashtra, through
Police Station Officer, Police Station,
Chandrapur City, Chandrapur,
Tq. & District Chandrapur
2. Ku. Vandana Dyaneshwar Moon,
Aged about 47 years,
R/o Buddha Nagar, Junona Chowk,
Babupeth Ward, Tq. & Dist.
Chandrapur. .... NON-APPLICANTS
Shri A.D. Hazare, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri N.S.Rao, A.P.P. for the non-applicant No.1/State.
______________________________________________________________________
CORAM : Z. A. HAQ AND
AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
DATE : 21.01.2021.
ORAL JUDGMENT: [PER: AMIT B. BORKAR, J.]
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith.
2. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of
29 apl 989.18.jud.odt
Criminal Procedure challenging the First Information Report
No.936/2018 dated 29th August 2018 registered with the non-
applicant No.1-Police Station for the offences punishable under
Sections 354-A (1)(2) of the Indian Penal Code read with Section
3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
3. The First Information Report came to be registered
against the applicant with the allegation that the applicant held
right hand of the non-applicant No.2 and embraced the non-
applicant No.2 in the office of the applicant. The applicant is,
therefore, challenging registration of the First Information Report by
filing the present application. This Court on 23 rd October 2018
issued notice to the non-applicants. The non-applicant No.1 in
pursuance of notice filed reply and it is stated that there is sufficient
material available with the prosecution that the applicant outraged
modesty of the non-applicant No.2. It is also stated that since the
non-applicant No.2 belongs of Scheduled Caste, the offence under
Section 3(1)(w) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is added. The
non-applicant No.2 also filed her reply and stated that on the day of
29 apl 989.18.jud.odt
incident the applicant outraged her modesty. It is also stated that
there are previous incidents of harassment by the applicant to the
non-applicant No.2. Therefore, she prayed for dismissal of Criminal
Application.
4. We have carefully considered the contents of the First
Information Report. From the material placed on record by the
applicant, it appears that in respect of incident occurred on 29 th
August 2018 before the registration of the First Information Report
by the non-applicant No.2, the present applicant has also filed the
First Information Report with the non-applicant No.1-Police Station
which is registered as the First Information Report No.936/2018. In
the said report, the applicant has made allegations against the non-
applicant No.2. In so far as, the First Information Report which is
impugned in the present application is concerned, we have carefully
considered the allegations in the context of offence alleged against
the applicant. The allegation in the First Information Report is to
the effect that the applicant went in the class where the non-
applicant No.2 was teaching and held her right hand. The next
allegation in the First Information Report is that the applicant called
the non-applicant No.2 in his office and after closing the door, he
29 apl 989.18.jud.odt
embraced the non-applicant No.2.
5. On careful perusal of the allegations made in the First
Information Report, we are of the view that the allegations as
regards the incident in the class room and the incident in the office
of applicant appears to be inherently improbable. Undisputably,
there is no departmental inquiry initiated against the applicant.
There is no corroborative material available with the prosecution
which supports the allegations in the First Information Report.
6. In so far as, the allegations against the applicant needs
the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 are concerned, there are
absolutely no allegations in the First Information Report which
fulfill the ingredients of offences alleged against the applicant under
the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. We are of the view that
continuance of proceedings against the applicant would amount to
abuse of process of law.
7. We therefore, pass the following order:-
29 apl 989.18.jud.odt
(i) The First Information Report No.936/2018 dated
29th August 2018 registered with the non-applicant No.1-Police
Station for the offences punishable under Sections 354-A (i)(2) of
the Indian Penal Code read with Section 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)(va) of the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 is quashed and set aside.
Rule is made absolute in the above terms.
JUDGE JUDGE
manisha
