HEMRAJ Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revision Petition No. 874/2006 has been filed by the complainant and the Revision Petition No. 93/2008 has been filed by the State.

(2.) Both these revisions petitions are against the same order dated 22.7.2006 passed by the earned Addl. Sessions Judge, Nathdwara in Sessions Case No. 6 of 2005, State v. Shyam Singh Charan, whereby he has allowed the application filed by the respondent under Section 197 Cr.P.C. and dropped the proceedings in Sessions Case No. 6/2005 under Section 3(1)(x) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to at 'the Act') and Section 504 I.P.C. Both revision petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.

(3.) The brief facts of the case, as it reveals from the available record, are that a complaint was filed by the present petitioner; on 13.2.2004 against the respondent, before Judicial Magistrate, Nathdwara, alleging therein that the petitioner is a Constable in the police service for last ten years and belongs to SC/ST class. It was further alleged that accused respondent is also in police service and he used to harass him time and again on count of his caste. It was alleged that while he was posted at Police Station Devdhar on 20.12.2003 he was deputed at the Bus-stand, Nathdwara in connection with maintaining law and order. At that time, the accused respondent gave him caste based abuses and defamed him. It was contended that the said incident was also witnessed by other constables. The said complaint was sent for investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to SHO, Nathdwara. It reveals that final negative police report was given and on that complaint made protest. The learned Judicial Magistrate, after considering the police report, did not accept the final report and found that the allegations related to SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and he took cognizance on 16.9.2004. also reveals that before the Judicial Magistrate, contentions were raised by the respondent with regard to provision of Section 197 Cr.P.C. but he did not pass any order and committed the case to the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Nathdwara. Before the learned Sessions Judge, again the respondent made the contention that at the time of alleged act, he was performing official duties, therefore, protection of Section 197 Cr.P.C. be extended to him and, no proceeding should have been continued against him. The learned Sessions Judge, after hearing both the sides, accepted the contentions of the respondent, and vide the impugned order, dropped the proceedings in Sessions Case No. 6/2005. Being felt aggrieved by the said order the complainant petitioner as well as State have filed the revision petitions before this Court. Notices of revision petitions were given, record of the case was called and the arguments were heard.