RAJBIR SINGH Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.279/2016 under Section 3 (1) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989) in short the Act registered on the complaint of respondent No.2.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the abovenoted FIR was registered as a counterblast to the action taken by the petitioner of issuing notice to the Cantonment Board on 26th October, 2015 asking them to take action against the unauthorized construction done by respondent No.2 whereafter the petitioner also lodged a writ petition being W.P.(C) No.11878/2015 before this Court which was finally disposed of on 18th September, 2017. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that on the bare reading of the FIR, it is not evident that offence punishable under Section 3 (1) (x) of the Act was committed as the words used have not been specified. Further the necessary ingredients of Section 3(1)(x) of the Act are also not specified as the words used were allegedly not used in "public view". The names of the alleged witnesses have also not been mentioned in the complaint on the basis of which FIR has been registered. Reliance is placed on the decisions in Subhash Kashinath Mahajan Vs. State of Maharashtra, (2018) AIR SC 1498, State Vs. Om Prakash Rana & Ors., (2014) 1 JCC 657, Vijender Singh Vs. State, (2015) 1 JCC 309 and Baste Subrayalu Vs. Robert mariadassou & Ors, (1987) CrLJ 27 The FIR in question is clearly mala fide and a counterblast to the action taken by the petitioner and be thus quashed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 on the contrary contends that the respondent No.2 had not carried out any unauthorized construction, rather the petitioner was carrying out unauthorized construction and thus demolition took place in his house on 28th August, 2015 and to seek vengeance he was abusing the respondent No.2/complainant.