MANSUR A KHAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEAVE to amend granted.

(2.) HEARD Mr. Mundargi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Saste, learned A. P. P. for respondent nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. Banatwala for respondent No. 3. 3. Rule, returnable forthwith. The learned counsel for the respondents waives service. By consent of the parties, heard finally. 4. Mr. Saste, learned A. P. P. waives service for respondent nos. 1 and 2. Mr. Banatwala, learned counsel waives service for respondent no. 3. Heard finally by the consent of the parties. 5. In this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the F. I. R. being C. R. No. LAC/94/2004 registered at Azad Maidan police station at the instance of respondent No. 3 for the offence mainly punishable under section 3 (1) (x) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, the Atrocities Act) and the provisions of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955. This petition for quashing has been filed on the ground that there is an amicable settlement between the petitioner and complainant respondent no. 3 (for short the complainant ). 6. The complaint came to be lodged by the complainant on 16. 1. 2004. The accusation made in the complaint was that on 15. 1. 2004 the petitioner abused and insulted the complainant in context of his caste. The complainant belongs to the Hindu Mahar which is recognised as a Schedule Caste and hence the offence was registered under the provisions of the Atrocities Act. In the application, the petitioner has stated that the complaint came to be filed due to some misunderstanding. The petitioner has denied the alleged utterances on the caste. The complainant has filed an affidavit stating that he has lodged the complaint without understanding the exact meaning and interpretation of the utterances. He has also stated that the petitioner never uttered such words as alleged by him in the complaint. The relevant paragraphs of the affidavit filed by respondent No. 3 read thus:

(3.) THAT on 16. 1. 2004. I lodged a complaint with Azad Maidan police station being C. R. LAC 94/2004, under the provisions of Schedule Tribes and Scheduled Castes (Atrocities) Act, alleging that Shri Mansur A. Khan had insulted me by giving bad words to me as well as regarding my caste. I say that as I belong to Hindu Mahar Scheduled Caste. I had filed the said complaint, as I misunderstood the remarks made by Mansur A. Khan to me regarding my work. I say that I had lodged the said complaint without understanding the exact interpretation of the words, which were said to me by Shri Mansur A. Khan. I further say that at the time of lodging of the said complaint, I was mentally upset and not in the proper frame of mind and had lodged the complaint, as I felt was correct.