Bombay High Court
Roshan S/O. Himmatrao Pudke vs The State Of Mah. Thr. Its Dsp, Sub ... on 15 October, 2025
2025:BHC-NAG:10950-DB
apl.913.2023.Judgment.odt
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.913 OF 2023
Roshan s/o Himmatrao Pudke,
Aged about 33 Years,
Occupation : Agriculture,
R/o. Dhusala, Post Kandri,
Tahsil Mohadi, District Bhandara. .... APPLICANT
// VERSUS //
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through its Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Sub-Division Tumsar, Bhandara.
2. State of Maharashtra ,
Through Station Incharge
Andhalgaon Police Station,
Tahsil Tumsar, District Bhandara.
3. Karu Dhanu Gajbhiye,
R/o. Dhusala, Tahsil Mohadi,
District Bhandara. .... NON-APPLICANTS
-------------------------------------------
Mrs. Mugdha Chandurkar, Counsel for the applicant.
Mr. Nikhil Joshi, APP for non-applicant Nos.1 and 2/State.
Mr. Shyam Jaiswal, appointed Counsel for non-applicant
No.3.
-------------------------------------------
CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE AND
NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 01.10.2025
PRONOUNCED ON : 15.10.2025
JUDGMENT :
(PER : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.)
1. Admit.
2. Heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel
of the parties.
apl.913.2023.Judgment.odt
3. Present application is preferred by the applicant for
quashing of the First Information Report (for short 'FIR') in
connection with Crime No.49/2023 registered with Police Station
Andhalgaon District Bhandara, for the offence punishable under
Section 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short 'the Act
of 1989') along with Sections 143 and 506 of the Indian Penal
Code (for short 'IPC') and consequent proceeding arising out of
the same bearing Sessions Trial No.48/2023 pending before the
3rd District and Additional Sessions Judge, and Special Judge,
Bhandara.
4. The crime is registered on the basis of a report lodged
by the informant non-applicant No.2 Karu Dhanu Gajbhiye on an
allegation that there is a previous enmity between him and one
Bhagwan Bhaiyaji Singanjude, who has lodged the false report
against his son Amol. On 29.03.2023 at about 11.30 a.m., he
had been to the Society for depositing some amount and was
returning back, at the relevant time, he halted at the Tea-Stall of
Rajesh Pudke. The present applicant along with the other
co-accused, came there and abused him on his caste by saying,
ßgkp gks dkÚ;k ekgÚ;k /ksM;k vkeP;k ukokph fjiksVZ ns.kkjk ;kyk lkY;kyk ekjk
;kps dqVaqckyk laiok gs nksu fru ?kjkps egkj dk; djrhy gk dqBsgh
fnlsy ;kykgh ekjk ;kps eqykykgh ekjk vkeps dk; gks.kkj vkgs Þ and thereby
apl.913.2023.Judgment.odt
humiliated and insulted him. On the basis of the said report,
police have registered the crime against the present applicant.
5. Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, who
submitted that general and omnibus allegation is levelled against
the present applicant. During the investigation, the Investigating
Officer has recorded the various statements of the witnesses. No
prima facie case is made out against the present applicant and
therefore, the FIR lodged against him deserves to be quashed
and set aside.
6. Per contra, learned APP strongly opposed the said
contention and submitted that there are specific abuses given to
the informant on his caste only with an intent to humiliate and
insult him. As far as the statements of the witnesses are
concerned, which are recorded which attract a prima facie case
against the present applicant and therefore, the application is
devoid of merit and liable to be dismissed.
7. Learned appointed Counsel for the informant
Mr. Shyam Jaiswal also reiterated the said contentions and
submitted that the statement of the witnesses discloses the
involvement of the present applicant and therefore, the
application deserves to be rejected.
apl.913.2023.Judgment.odt
8. On hearing both sides and on going through the
investigation papers from which it reveals that as far as the
recitals of the FIR are concerned, general and omnibus allegation
is levelled against the applicant. During the investigation, the
statement of the Tea-Stall owner was also recorded, which shows
that no such incident of abusing on the caste has taken place.
The statement of other independent witnesses also not supports
the contentions that there was any incident as to the abuses, as
to the caste is concerned. In view of the principle laid down by
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana and
others Vs Bhajan Lal and others reported in 1992 Supp. (1)
SCC 335 wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court laid down the
principles/guidelines while considering the application under
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
"(1) Where the allegations made in the first
information report or the complaint, even if they are
taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety
do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a
case against the accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the first information report
and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not
disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation
by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code
except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview
of Section 155(2) of the Code.
apl.913.2023.Judgment.odt
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the
FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of
the same do not disclose the commission of any offence
and make out a case against the accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a
cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable
offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer
without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under
Section 155(2) of the Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint
are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of
which no prudent person can ever reach a just
conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding
against the accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any
of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act
(under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the
institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or
where there is a specific provision in the Code or the
concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the
grievance of the aggrieved party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended
with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is
maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for
wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to
spite him due to private and personal grudge."
apl.913.2023.Judgment.odt
9. In the light of the above principles, if the facts of the
present case are taken into consideration, and even accepting
the allegations as it is, except the reference of the caste, no
other material is collected during the investigation to show that
with an intention to humiliate the caste was referred by the
present accused. Moreover, there is an omnibus and general
allegation against all the accused, including the present
applicant.
10. The basic ingredients to constitute the offence under
Section 3(1)(r) of the Act, 1989 are:
(a) Accused person must not be a member of the
Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe;
(b) Accused must intentionally insult or intimidate a
member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe;
(c) Accused must do so with the intent to humiliate such a
person; and
(d) Accused must do so at any place within public view.
11. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Shajan Skaria
Vs. The State of Kerala and another in Criminal Appeal
No.2622/2024 decided on 23.08.2024, in para No.58
observed that "all insults or intimidations to a member of the
Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe will not amount to an
apl.913.2023.Judgment.odt
offence under the Act, 1989 unless such insult or intimidation is
on the ground that the victim belongs to Scheduled Caste or
Scheduled Tribe." By referring the earlier decision in the case of
Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand reported in (2020) 10
SCC 710, the Hon'ble Apex Court further observed that Section
3(1)(r) of the Act, 1989 is not established merely on the fact that
the complainant is a member of a Scheduled Caste or a
Scheduled Tribe, unless there is an intention to humiliate such a
member for the reason that he belongs to such community. In
other words, it is not the purport of the Act, 1989 that every act
of intentional insult or intimidation meted by a person who is not
a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe to a person
who belongs to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe would
attract Section 3(1)(r) of the Act, 1989 merely because it is
committed against a person who happens to be a member of a
Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. On the contrary, Section
3(1)(r) of the Act, 1989 is attracted where the reason for the
intentional insult or intimidation is that the person who is
subjected to it belongs to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe.
12. While interpreting the meaning of the expression
"intent to humiliate" the Hon'ble Apex Court further observed
that "The words "with intent to humiliate" as they appear in the
text of Section 3(1)(r) of the Act, 1989 are inextricably linked to
apl.913.2023.Judgment.odt
the caste identity of the person who is subjected to intentional
insult or intimidation. Not every intentional insult or intimidation
of a member of a SC/ST community will result into a feeling of
caste-based humiliation. It is only in those cases where the
intentional insult or intimidation takes place either due to the
prevailing practice of untouchability or to reinforce the
historically entrenched ideas like the superiority of the "upper
castes" over the "lower castes/untouchables", the notions of
'purity' and 'pollution', etc. that it could be said to be an insult or
intimidation of the type envisaged by the Act, 1989."
13. Having regard to the above said principles laid down
by the Hon'ble Apex Court and considering the facts of the
present case, there is nothing to even prima facie indicate that
the applicant has uttered such words with intent to humiliate or
insult the informant. In fact, mere knowledge of the fact that
the victim is a member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled
Tribe is not sufficient to attract Section 3(1)(r) of the Act. The
recitals of the FIR only shows that there is a reference of the
caste and that is also the allegation is omnibus in nature. There
is no specific allegation levelled against the present applicant. As
far as Section 143 of IPC is concerned, except the bare
statement of the informant that the applicant was a member of
an unlawful assembly and the ingredients of Section 506 of IPC
apl.913.2023.Judgment.odt
are also not made out. In view of that, the applicant has made
out a case for quashing of the FIR in connection with Crime
No.49/2023 and consequent arising out of the same. In view of
that, we proceed to pass following order:
ORDER
(i) The application is allowed.
(ii) The First Information Report in connection
with Crime No.49/2023 registered with Police Station
Andhalgaon, District Bhandara, for the offence
punishable under Sections 143 and 506 of the Indian
Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and consequent proceeding
arising out of the same Sessions Trial No.48/2023
pending before the 3rd District and Additional Sessions
Judge, and Special Judge, Bhandara, are hereby
quashed and set aside.
14. The fees of the appointed Counsel be quantified as
per rules.
15. The application is disposed of in the above said terms.
(NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J) (URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J)
Sarkate.
Signed by: Mr. A.R. Sarkate
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 15/10/2025 17:24:25
