Adv. Sudesh Bhaurao More And ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Through ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 3961 Bom

                                                    1              30-J-APL-259-15.odt

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                     NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

             CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 259 OF 2015

 1. Adv. Sudesh Bhaurao More,
    Aged about : 54 years,
    Occu : Lawyer / Journalism,
    R/o C/o Ramdas Dharmale,
    Dayanand Nagar, Anjangaon-Surji,
    District - Amravati.

 2. Gajendra Pralhadrao Mandlik,
    Aged about : 39 years,
    Occu : Journalism,
    R/o Pan-Atai, Gulzarpura,
    Anjangaon-Surji,
    District - Amravati.                                     ... APPLICANTS

                               VERSUS

 1. State of Maharashtra,
    Through P.S.O. Anjangaon-Surji,
    Police Station,
    District - Amravati.

 2. Vinit Digambar Dongardive,
      Aged about : 34 years,
      Occu : Councillor,
      R/o Waghpura, Anjangaon-Surji,
      District - Amravati.                                    ... NON-APPLICANTS
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Shri K. P. Mahalle, Advocate for the applicants.
 Ms. Mayuri Deshmukh, APP for non-applicant No.1-State.
 Shri Barun Kumar, Advocate h/f Shri N.B. Rathod, Advocate for
 non-applicant No.2.
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                CORAM: Z.A. HAQ & AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.

DATED : 03/03/2021.

JUDGMENT : (PER : AMIT B. BORKAR, J.)

2 30-J-APL-259-15.odt

1. By this application under Section 482 of the Code

of Criminal Procedure, the applicants have challenged First

Information Report No.3061/2015 registered by the non-applicant

No.1 - Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections

3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 506 of the Indian

Penal Code.

2. The First Information Report came to be lodged

against the applicants with the accusations that the applicants

hurled abuses in the name of caste against the non-applicant No.2.

It is alleged in the First Information Report that the applicants

have published defamatory statements against the non-applicant

No.2.

3. The applicants have, therefore, challenged

registration of First Information Report by filing present

application. This Court on 21/04/2015 issued notice to the non-

applicants. By way of order dated 05/05/2015, it was directed

that no coercive steps be taken against the applicant No.1. This

Court on 19/07/2016 issued Rule and directed that there shall be

stay to all further proceedings.

3 30-J-APL-259-15.odt

4. The non-applicant No.1 has filed its reply and has

stated that the applicant No.2 hurled abuses in the name of caste

against the non-applicant No.2. It is stated that the applicants are

not co-operating with the Investigating Officer and therefore, the

Investigating Officer is unable to investigate the matter in proper

and fair manner. It is further stated that the Investigating Officer

has collected material against the present applicants to show their

involvement in the crime alleged against them.

5. Learned Advocate for the applicants, on

instructions from the applicant No.2 states that the applicant No.2

be permitted to withdraw the application with liberty to adopt

appropriate proceedings in case charge sheet is filed against the

applicant No.2.

6. We have carefully considered the contents of

allegations against the applicant No.1. From the allegations in the

First Information Report, it appears that there is no allegation

against the applicant No.1 that he had hurled abuses against the

non-applicant No.2 in the name of caste. In the context of

ingredients of Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code against the

applicant No.1, we are satisfied that the contents of offences

4 30-J-APL-259-15.odt

alleged against the applicant No.1 are not made out even if the

allegations in the First Information Report are accepted.

7. We are, therefore, satisfied that the continuation of

proceedings against the applicant No.1 would amount to an abuse

of process of Court.

8. We, therefore, pass the following order :-

i] The First Information Report No.3061/2015

dated 03/04/2015 for the offence punishable under

Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,

1989 and Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code is

quashed and set aside qua the applicant No.1.

ii] The application of the applicant No.2 is

allowed to withdraw present application with

liberty as prayed for in Paragraph No.5 of this

judgment.

9. Rule is made partly absolute in the above

terms.

                       JUDGE                        JUDGE

 Choulwar