VINAYAK Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith and heard by consent of the parties. By this application, the applicants have challenged the order below Exh. 1 in Regular Criminal Case No. 55/2012, pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Akot and consequent First Information Report No. 101/2012 registered on 24-5-2012.

(2.) In support of the application, learned Counsel Mr. R.L. Khapre, vehemently, argued that the order impugned under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. was passed by the learned Trial Court and consequently, the First Information Report No. 101/2012 was registered after the period of lapse of about 30 years for which there is absolutely no explanation and non-applicant No. 2's action was clearly malafide and with deliberate intention to harass the applicants. He then argued that even according to the non-applicant No. 2, he belongs to Scheduled Caste so also the applicants. Even then without going through these facts, the Trial Court has passed the impugned order in relation to offences under Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, which shows total non-application of mind. He then argued that perusal of the first information report itself shows that no offence is made out and still the trial court has directed investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He then argued that the record before the Court is contrary to what is alleged in the complaint under Section 3(vi)(v) of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and, therefore, without giving any reasons and ignoring those important documents and admitted facts, the Trial Court could not have passed the impugned order. He relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Thermax Ltd., & Ors. Vs. K. M. Johny & ors., 2011 AllMR(Cri) 3603 (S.C.)].

(3.) Per contra, learned APP Mr. T. A. Mirza argued that as a matter of fact, the Police Station Officer, Akot did not register the offence at the inception as the complaint filed by the non-applicant No. 2 appeared to be of civil nature. However, according to him, since the Magistrate has passed the order under Section 156(3) of Criminal Procedure Code, there was no alternative to the Police Station Officer, but to register the First Information Report. Therefore, no fault can be found out with the non-applicant No. 1. He, therefore, left it to this Court to pass the appropriate order.