Telangana High Court Quashes FIR Against Junior Civil Judges Accused Under SC/ST Act By Colleague
The Telangana High Court has granted relief to two Junior Civil Judges in a long pending case of 10 years, wherein they were charged under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
The allegation against the two judicial officers (petitioners) was that, during their time in the Judicial Academy, they had gotten into a tussle with their co-officers (R5 and other) and abused them using caste-based slurs.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Sreenivas Rao, before whom the matter was placed, noted that the FIR seemed to be a counter-blast to the complaint registered by the petitioners, which led to the removal of the respondents.
Relying on, Kapil Agarwal and others, Directorate of Revenue and another v. Mohammed Nisar Holia, Mohammad Wajid and another, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal the bench reiterated that, it is important to understand the circumstances under which an FIR was filed, and consider all aspects while hearing a petition for quash.
“It is pertinent to mention that respondent No.5 has lodged a complaint against the petitioners on 09.10.2015, subsequent to the report submitted by the Director, Andhra Pradesh Judicial Academy, Secunderabad, to the Registrar (Vigilance) basing upon the information/complaint of the petitioners and after conducting enquiry against respondent No.5 and Mr.S.Kalyan Chakravarthy. It clearly shows that respondent No.5 lodged a complaint against the petitioners maliciously as a counter blast and the same is clear abuse of process of law and the principle laid down in State of Haryana (supra) is squarely applicable to the present case.”
Background:
According to the narration of the petitioners, they had been appointed as Junior Civil in 2013 and sent for Judicial Training in Bangalore, Karnataka in the same year. In October 2015, they had a strange encounter with their co-officers. It is averred that the petitioner officers had left the judicial academy and gone out for dinner. Upon their arrival, they noticed that the main door to their flat was open and the door to their bedrooms was bolted from the inside. When they knocked the door, R5 opened the door and informed them that one Kalyan Chakravarthy was in the bathroom. After the bathroom door was opened, R5 threatened to commit suicide and pin it on the petitioners in her suicide note.
After some commotion, there was some intervention from other colleagues and trainees, the petitioners and respondent were calmed down for the night. However, a few days later, the petitioners submitted a written complaint to the Director, of Andhra Pradesh Judicial Academy. Following this, the Registrar issued suspension proceedings against R5 and Kalyan. Subsequently, disciplinary proceedings were initiated, a departmental inquiry was conducted and the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad decided, in 2017 to impose the highest penalty and remove the respondent and others from service.
The bench noted, that only after the order of removal, was the FIR preferred by the respondent. Thus, it was concluded that an FIR registered after 2 years, and only after the removal order was passed, would indicate that it was a counter-blast to the order of removal.
With that observation, the High Court quashed the FIR.
“For the foregoing reasons as well as the principles laid down in the above judgments (supra), the F.I.R.No.258 of 2015 on the file of Marredpally P.S., Hyderabad-Respondent No.4, is liable to be quashed.”
Kum. Asifa Sulthana vs. High Court Judicature at Hyderabad
WP 34352 of 2015
Counsel for petitioner: N. Naveen Kumar
Counsel for the respondent: P. Sridhar Reddy (Special GP)