BIDHU BHUSAN RATH Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C. in short) with a prayer to quash the order dated 8.9.1997 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge -cum -Special Judge. Khurda, in G. R. Case No. 3120 of 2000 taking cognizance against the petitioners of the offences under Section 288/290/337/341/504/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC in short) and Section 3 (ii) and (x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short 'the Act') and issuing processes against them.

(2.) THE petitioners in this application have mainly taken two grounds: (i) that no case has been made out for the offences for which cognizance has been taken against the petitioners; and (ii) that even though the case was registered against the petitioners for the offence under Section 3 (ii) and (x) of the Act and cognizance Decided on 24th April, 2003. was taken thereunder, investigation has not been done by a Deputy Superintendent of Police as required by the statue.

(3.) IT is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the allegations made in the F.I.R as well as the statements of the witnesses recorded Under Section 161, Cr.P.C. during the investigation do not directly or vicariously make the petitioners liable for the offences under Sections 341/323/504/34, I.P.C. read with Section 3 of the Act. On perusal of the F.I.R. I find that there is no allegation against the petitioners that they had made any wrongful restraint of the informant or voluntarily caused hurt or intentionally insulted anybody else with an intent to provoke breach of the peace or knowing the informant to be a man of Scheduled Caste had committed such offence or had shared the common intention with anybody else for commission of the aforesaid offences. The F.I.R. is very clear. It is stated therein that the informant was assaulted when he requested the contractor to rescue the labourers from the site of accident. One Harish Chandra Pandey, S.I. of Police of Sahidnagar P.S., who on getting information visited the spot along with two other S.Is. and the I.I.C. of the P.S., in his statement has stated that the informant alleged before the I.I.C that the contractor - Ramani Ranjan Das abused him in obscene language and dealt some blows on his face. There is no allegation at all against the present petitioners implicating them with the alleged offences in any manner. That apart, one Surendra Sirka, who was working in the work site as a helper to the carpenter, in his statement Under Section 161. Cr.P.C. has stated that while the roof casting of the building was continuing, the centering of the roof collapsed as a result of which 6 -7 labourers were injured and immediately Ramani Ranjan Babu sent them to the Capital Hospital for treatment in an auto - rickshaw. To the same effect is the statement of one Bhaskar Chandra Adhikari, Prahalad Kumar Sinha and Panu Patra in their statement Under Section 161. Cr.P.C. have stated that it was Ramani Ranjan Das. who assaulted the rick -shaw -puller, i.e., the informant.