STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. FARUQ IMAM SAYYAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant-State of Maharashtra has filed this application for leave to file appeal against the judgment and order dated 29th January, 2007 passed by the learned Ad-hoc Addl. Sessions Judge,5, Kolhapur in Sessions Case No.36 of 2006. By the said judgment and order, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the respondents-orig. accused Nos.1 to 4 of the offences punishable under Section 3(1)(x), 3(1)(viii) and 3(1)(ix) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, hereinafter referred to as the SC and ST Act, for the sake of brevity.

(2.) HEARD the learned APP for the Applicant-State. Perused the judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge as well as the evidence which has been produced by the learned APP.

(3.) IF the caste of the complainant is not disclosed in the FIR, the police authorities could not be said to have any material to invoke the powers under Chapter XII of the Cr.P.C. and to commence the investigation considering the complaint to be a cognizable complaint. Useful reference may be made to a decision of the Division Bench of this Court (V.K.Barde and A.P.Deshpande, JJ.) dated 20th April, 2001 in the case of Anant Vasantlal Sambre V. State of Maharashtra, in Cri.W.P.No.49 of 2001, in which it was held that if the First Information Report does not contain an averment that the accused does not belong to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, the offence under Section 3 of the Atrocities Act, cannot be registered."