SATYANARAYAN BISANLAL AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondents no. 1 and 2. None appears for respondent no.2. Being aggrieved by order dated 16.6.2004 rejecting "B" summary submitted by respondent no. 2 in connection with FIR No. 3040/03, the applicant has approached this Court invoking its inherent powers vested under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

(2.) Applicant is owner of field survey number 11 situated at mouza Bajitpur, Tahsil Achalpur, District Amravati admeasuring 11.27 acres. An alluvial land admeasuring 2.32 acres was added in applicant s field as per the order dated 19.8.1954 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Achalpur and revenue entry to that effect has also been taken. Since then the applicant is owner and is in possession of field having area of 14.19 acres. In the year 1962-63 one Gotuji Keraji Jamnerkar (father-in-law of respondent no.3) had tried to encroach upon the field of the applicant due to which applicant s father filed a complaint against said Gotuji before the Naib Tahsildar. The Naib Tahsildar vide order dated 1.10.1965 directed said Gotuji to remove encroachment within seven days and imposed fine of Rs. 100/-. Appeal filed by Gotuji came to be dismissed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Achalpur vide order dated 20.12.1965. Thereafter Gotuji filed Civil Suit bearing No. 689 of 1968 which was also dismissed vide judgment and order dated 31.7.1970. Appeal filed before the District Judge was dismissed and Second Appeal No. 417 of 1972 filed before this Court was also dismissed vide judgment and order dated 19.11.1996. It appears that apploicant Satyanarayan has filed Civil Suit bearing No. 350 of 1987 regarding alluvial land and the same is pending before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amravati.

(3.) Respondent no. 3 lodged report on 23.9.2003 against the applicant alleging that on 22.9.2003 applicant and his associates came to her field. At that time she was doing work in field. Applicant then, it is alleged, abused complainant in filthy language in the name of caste (she belongs to "Mahar" caste) and threatened her of dire consequences if her husband entered the field. Respondent no. 3 lodged report for the offence punishable under Section 3 (1) (x) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Respondent no. 1 registered the said offence against the applicant and took up the matter for investigation. During investigation statements of 12/13 concerned persons were recorded. Respondent no. 1 found that the report lodged by respondent no. 3 was false and therefore, filed "B" summary. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amravati, however, rejected "B" summary and hence, the present application.