Ajeet Singh Bhadoria vs State Of M.P. & Anr

This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the FIR in Crime No.25/2016 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District

Bhind for offence punishable under Sections 294, 323, 506, 327 of IPC and under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

In the present application it is nowhere mentioned that whether the police after concluding the investigation has filed the charge sheet or not and if the

charge sheet has been filed, then what is the status of the trial.

Be that as it may.

The facts of the case are that apart from the different offences under the Indian Penal Code, an offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled

Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has also been registered against the applicant.

This Court by order dated 23.1.2017 had directed the parties to appear before the Principal Registrar of this Court for verification of factum of

compromise.

After recording the statements of the witnesses, the Principal Registrar of this Court has given the following report:

“According to Sec. 320 of CRPC the offences U/s 223, 294, 506 of IPC is compoundable. But Sec. 327 of IPC and 3(1) (x) of atrocities Act are

not compoundable

The Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab &

Anr. reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 has held that the proceedings cannot be quashed where the case has been registered under the Special Act. This

Court in the case of Monu @ Ranu Kushwah & Ors. vs. State of M.P. & Anr. reported in 2017(2) M.P.L.J. (Cri.) 28 has held as under:-

“10. We may profitably refer to Articles 15 and 17 of the Constitution of India. Article 17 of the Constitution of India reads as under:-

 “17. Abolition of Untouchability.- “Untouchability†is abolished and its practice in any form is forbidden The enforcement of any disability

arising out of “Untouchabilityâ€​ shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law.â€​

 *  * * * * *

Thus, it is clear that the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is special statute enacted with an intention to

eradicate untouchability and to make stringent provisions in case any offence is committed against the member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled

Tribe. Â

The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 was enacted because in spite of various measures adopted to

improve the socioeconomic condition of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, they had remained vulnerable. They are subjected to various

offences, indignities, humiliations and harassments only because of the fact that they belong to either Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes. When

they assert their rights and resist untouchability, the vested interest tried to cow them down and terrorize them. Sometimes the members of the

Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes who are in the occupation of the agricultural lands, become victims of attacks by a vested interest, therefore,

the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 was enacted as it was considered necessary that not only the word

'atrocities' should be defined but stringent measures should be introduced to provide for higher punishments for committing such atrocities. Therefore,

any act which is punishable under Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has to be dealt with seriously and

cannot be treated at par with offences punishable under the Panel Code.

Furthermore, in order to achieve the object of protecting the dignity and rights of the members of a Scheduled Castes and a Scheduled Tribes, certain

amendments have been introduced by the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 making more

stringent provisions. Thus, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is a special statute which has been enacted

with the specific purpose of protecting the dignity, integrity as well as the rights of the members of the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes.

 *  * * * * *

The fact that the applicants had called the complainant as “adiwasin†clearly show that they had committed this offence intentionally to

humiliate and insult a member of a Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in a place within a public view. The allegations made in the FIR also

clearly shows that the applicants had intentionally touched the complainant with evil intentions who belongs to a Scheduled Castes or Scheduled

Tribes. In such circumstances, it cannot be held that the offences committed by the applicants were individual in nature and not against the society. So

far as the order on which the counsel for the applicants has placed reliance are concerned suffice it to say that those orders have been passed in the

facts and circumstances of that case.â€​

Thus, where the offence has been registered under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and the said Act being

Special Act, then the proceedings cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise. Accordingly, without considering the allegations which have been

against the applicant, it is held that the FIR against the applicant cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise.

Accordingly, the application fails and is hereby dismissed.