Complaint Didn't Mention Accused Was Aware Of Caste, Alleged Remark Wasn't Made In Public: Punjab & Haryana HC Quashes SC/ST Act Case
Aiman J. Chishti
2 Dec 2024 3:45 PM IST
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has quashed the FIR and related proceedings under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act), observing that it was no where mentioned in the FIR lodged by the complainant that accused persons were aware of his caste.
Justice NS Shekhawat noted, "While narrating this incident, it has no where been mentioned in the complaint by the respondent No. 2/complainant that the petitioners were aware that the respondent No. 2 belonged to a scheduled caste. Merely because of the fact that the respondent No. 2 had been employed by Balbir Singh in a nearby fields is no ground to draw an inference in this regard."
The Court further noted that the utterances did not constitute an offence as the alleged incident had not taken place in a public place.
Thus, the judge opined that the prosecution of the petitioners in respect of the offence under Section Section 3(x)(ii)(viii) of the SC and ST Act, as such, was not warranted and the proceedings in this regard cannot be sustained.
These observations were made while hearing the plea to quash the criminal complaint lodged in 2013 under Sections 323, 506 and 34 IPC and Section 3(x)(ii)(viii) of SC/ST Act.
It was alleged that the accused persons had passed casteist remarks while beating the complainant and gave death threat if he continue to work on fields of one Balbir Singh.
However, the petitioners contended that fight broke between complainant party and petitioners and severe injuries were caused to petitioners.
Immediately after the occurrence, the matter was reported by the petitioners to the police and one FIR under Sections 324, 326, 341 and 506 of IPC was ordered to be registered against the complainant in the present case and co-accused. Even, the complainant was arrested by the police and was later on released on bail.
After examining the submissions, the Court noted that the complainant moved the complaint under SC/ST Act, after about 08 months of the occurrence.
"Thus, it is apparent that there is considerable delay in filing the instant complaint before the trial Court, which had not been explained by the prosecution even during the course of preliminary evidence. This delay raises serious concerns with regard to the veracity and purity of the allegations levelled by the complainant and certainly affects the credibility and the evidentiary value of the allegations levelled by the complainant," noted the Court.
Justice Shekhawat highlighted that it is not spelled out from the allegations levelled in the complaint that the petitioners were conscious of the fact that the complainant belonged to a scheduled castes at the time of the alleged incident.
The Court also observed that trial is pending since 5 years and the complainant made no efforts for the trial of the present complaint as well as trial in a State case by the same Court.
In the light of the above, the Court quashed the impugned complaint and summoning order.
Mr. Tarunveer Vashisht, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr. I.P.S. Sabharwal, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Ritesh Aggarwal, Advocate, for respondent No. 2.
Title: Gurcharan Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another
