Nutan @ Bablu Mahadeorao Dhole vs State Of Maharashtra, Through ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 4122 Bom

                                               1                                19-apl-501-15j.odt



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

               CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 501 OF 2015

  Nutan @ Bablu Mahadeorao Dhole,
  Aged about 41 years, Occ. Business,
  R/o. Ramkrushna Nagar,
  Digras, District Yavatmal.                                                . . . APPLICANT

                         ...V E R S U S..

  1. State of Maharashtra through
     Police Station Digras,
     Dist. Yavatmal.

  2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
     Digras, Dist. Yavatmal
     (Investigating Officer)

  3. Smt. Maya Rajendra Shirsat,
     Aged about 25 years, Occ. Labourer,
     R/o. Village Aarambhi, Tq. Digras,
     Dist. Yavatmal.                                                . . NON-APPLICANTS

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Ms. Prajakta S. Chaudhari, Advocate h/f. Shri Abhay Sambre, Advocate
 for applicant.
 Shri N. S. Rao, A.P.P. for non-applicant nos. 1 and 2/State.
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               CORAM :- Z. A. HAQ AND
                                        AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.

DATED :- 05.03.2021

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

1. By this application under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, the applicant has challenged the registration of

First Information Report (FIR) No. 451/2014, dated 18.12.2014

2 19-apl-501-15j.odt

registered with the non-applicant no. 1-Police Station for the offence

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

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections

354B and 323 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The FIR came to be registered against the applicant with

accusation that on 18.12.2014, the applicant allegedly offended

modesty of the non-applicant no. 3 and abused her in the name of

caste. It is also alleged that the applicant tried to torn blouse of the

non-applicant no.3. It is also stated in the FIR that one Ashok Jadhav

alongwith four other persons rescued the non-applicant no.3. The

applicant has therefore challenged registration of the FIR by filing the

present application.

3. This Court on 07.08.2015 issued notice to the non-

applicants and directed that no coercive steps shall be taken against

the applicant. On 14.01.2016, this Court admitted the present

application and continued the interim relief granted on 07.08.2015. In

pursuance of the notice, the non-applicant no. 1 filed reply and it is

stated that there was altercation between the applicant and the non-

applicant no. 3, on account of Income Certificate. The Investigating

Officer has recorded the statement of four witnesses, who had

supported the prosecution and therefore, it is stated that present

3 19-apl-501-15j.odt

application deserves to be dismissed.

4. We have carefully considered the allegation in the FIR and

statements recorded by the prosecution in case diary produced by

learned A.P.P.. Having gone through the statement of the witnesses, it

appears that one Ashok Jadahv, who is named in the FIR, has

specifically stated that there was no incident occurred as alleged by the

non-applicant no.3. Though, the other three witnesses have supported

the prosecution but, independent witnesses namely neighbours have

not supported the case of the prosecution. The statement of the

witnesses, who have supported the case of the prosecution are stereo-

type and exactly similar.

5. In view of the statement of Ashok Jadav, who is named in

the FIR and considering the fact that statement of other witnesses, who

were supported the prosecution are mechanically recorded and stereo-

type, we are satisfied that prosecution launched against the applicant

is not a legitimate prosecution and continuance of it would amount to

abuse of process of Court.

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

4 19-apl-501-15j.odt

First Information Report No. 451/2014, dated 18.12.2014

for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled

Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

and Sections 354B and 323 of the Indian Penal Code is quashed and

set aside.

Rule is made absolute in the above terms.

                             JUDGE                                          JUDGE




RR Jaiswal