PUSHPA VIJAY BONDE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order of reference dated 21st January, 2009 which has occasioned the constitution of this Full bench, has been passed by the Division bench holding that the view taken by the another Division bench in Anant Vasantlal Sambre v. State of Maharashtra in Writ Petition No. 49 of 2001 decided on 20th April, 2001 and in the judgment of the learned Single Judge in the case of Manohar Martandrao Kulkarni v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. reported in 2006 (1) Bom.C.R. (Cri.) 778 needs reconsideration. In these judgments the learned Judges have observed that it is a requirement under Section 3 of the Scheduled Casts and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short "the Atrocities Act") that the complainant should disclose the caste of the accused in the complaint itself and if there is no such disclosure the complaint cannot be registered and if it is registered, it is liable to be quashed.

(2.) In the present writ petition it is contended by the petitioner-accused that nowhere in the complaint, the complainant has disclosed the caste of the petitioner-accused and it is a requirement under Section 3 of the Atrocities Act that the offence should be committed by a person who does not belong to a scheduled caste and scheduled tribe. It is further contended that since there is no such assertion made in the complaint or the report it is liable to be quashed.

(3.) It would be advantageous to reproduce the order of reference dated 21.1.2009 passed by the Division Bench for better appreciation of the question referred to the Full Bench: