ASHABAI MACHINDRA ADHAGALE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) An interesting question of law arises in this appeal. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:

(3.) In support of the appeal, learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the view taken by the Bombay High Court is contrary to one taken by the Orissa High Court. It is submitted that the offence primarily relates to purported perpetration of crime on the victim because of his or her caste. It is for the accused to show that he does not belong to higher caste and that is a matter of evidence. It is not that in the instant case there was no reference to the caste of an accused as it is clearly mentioned in the FIR that the offence is relatable to Section 3(1)(xi) of the Act. Therefore, there is a reference though indirectly to the caste of the accused. Even otherwise it is submitted that the non-mention of the caste of the accused cannot be a ground to quash the proceedings. At the framing of charge or in case the charge sheet is filed and/or during trial the accused can establish that he does not belong to higher caste. It is submitted that FIR is not an encyclopedia of all events and basic ingredients of offence are clearly made out.