GOVIND YADAV Vs. STATE OF C.G.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. The applicants have has preferred this application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 78/11, registered in Police Station - Anushuchit Jati & Anushuchit Janjati Kalyan Thana, Janjgir, District - Jangjir Champa, for alleged commission of offence under Sections 294, 506, 323 & 452 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short ''the Act of 1989").

(2.) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that in the matter of dispute with regard to preparation of rashan card, on 7.9.2011, the complainant was abused and threatened using caste language and he was asked by the applicants either to act according to their dictates or to get transfer or resign from service. It is further alleged that thereafter, in the intervening night of 10-11th September, 2011, the applicants entered the house of the complainant and he was assaulted with the help of lathi.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicants argued that the applicants are being falsely implicated by the complainant, who is an employee of Nagar Panchayat working as Revenue Inspector, wherein applicant No. 1 is elected president, applicant No. 2 is an employee and applicant No. 3 is ex-councilor. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that number of complaints in writing were made against working of the complainant by the residents of area and applicant No. 1 had ordered an inquiry, because of which, he is being falsely implicated. It is further submitted that the complainant had made a written report to the Superintendent of Police and the matter was inquired into and the report was found to be baseless. Whereafter, the report has been now lodged in the A.J.K. Police Station, wherein offences have been registered without any basis, on afterthought grounds. It is also submitted that the allegation is prima facie a case of false implication because after the date and time of incident though a report was lodged in the Police Station Shivarinarayan on 11.9.2011, the only report made was with regard to missing of mobile and in subsequent report made to the Superintendent of Police in writing which bears date 13.9.2011. the allegation is that three persons with covered faces who were gundas sent by the applicants entered the house and assaulted and thereafter, in the FIR, which has been lodged on 14.9.2011, an entirely different and contradictory story has been made, stating that the applicants entered the house, which clearly shows false implication. Learned counsel further submits that the background in which the dispute is alleged to have taken place, even if the incident which is alleged to have happened on 7.9.2011 is accepted on its face value, no case of commission of offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the Act of 1989 would be made out and, therefore, bar under Section 18 would not be attracted.