Bombay High Court
Mahadeo Sitaram Gadge vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 2 December, 2022
Author: Mangesh S. Patil
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil
1 Cr. Appln. 1751 / 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1751 OF 2021
Mahadeo S/o Sitaram Gadge,
Age : 57 years, Occ: Service as a
I/c Deputy Superintendent of Land Record,
Sakri, Tq. Sakri, Dist. Dhule,
R/o : Flat No. 5, Sadguru Apartment,
Adkenagar, Anand Road, Deolali Camp,
Nashik .. Applicant
Versus
1) The State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station Sakri,
Tq. Sakri, Dist. Dhule
2) Vinod S/o Vasant Patil,
Age : 43 years, Occu : Business,
R/o : Behind the Sundar Mall,
Sakri, Tq. Sakri Dist. Dhule .. Respondents
...
Advocate for the applicant : Mr. Sunil S. Magre
APP for the respondent - State : Mr. S.J. Salgare
Advocate for the respondent no. 2 : Mr. G.D. Jain h/f. Mr. A.S. Sawant
...
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL &
ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 15 NOVEMBER 2022
PRONOUNCED ON : 02 DECEMBER 2022
JUDGMENT (MANGESH S. PATIL, J.) :
The applicant is invoking the powers of this Court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and seeking quashment of crime no. 183 of 2021 registered with Sakri Police Station, Tq. Sakri, District Dhule for the offence punishable under ::: Uploaded on - 02/12/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 03/12/2022 21:01:23 ::: 2 Cr. Appln. 1751 / 2021 section 295, 295-A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, registered on an FIR filed by the respondent no. 2.
2. We have heard both the sides.
3. The sum and substance of the allegations in the FIR filed on 14th June 2021 are to the effect that the respondent no. 2 is a small time vendor selling snacks from place to place. He alleged that he also goes to the premises of Panchayat Samiti office and knows the employees therein. He alleged that in the premises of Panchayat Samiti, there is Office of the Land Records. There is an idol of Mahadeo adjacent to that office of the Land Records installed on a platform with necessary articles for performing pooja. He alleged that on 9th June 2021 in the afternoon hours when he had gone to the office of Panchayat Samiti, he saw that the present applicant was asking couple of his Peons, namely, Ambarsingh Vanjari and Mahendra Bhalchandra Pawar to remove and throw away the idol and other articles from the platform and even threatened to demolish the platform. When the Peons were reluctant, he threatened them and then caused them to remove the utensils for performing pooja, a small idol of Ganpati and photo frame of Saibaba. They obliged him by throwing those outside the compound wall. He, therefore, alleged that by such conduct, the applicant offended the religious feelings. ::: Uploaded on - 02/12/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 03/12/2022 21:01:23 ::: 3 Cr. Appln. 1751 / 2021
4. The learned advocate for the applicant would submit that there is enormous delay in lodging the FIR. Ingredients for constituting the offence cannot be made out. Though it is a public office frequented by number of Government servants, there was no intention much less malice to offend any religion or to injure someone's religious beliefs. He was working as a Deputy Superintendent of Land Records at Dhule and was holding additional charge of the office of Taluka Inspector of Land Records, Sakri wherein the incident had taken place. Concocted and false allegations have been levelled against him and he is being falsely implicated at the instance of someone who is behind the curtains. The FIR has been lodged with due deliberations. It would be sheer abuse of the process of law if the applicant is allowed to be prosecuted with such concocted and delayed allegations and the case is squarely covered by the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the matter of State of Haryana and others Vs. Bhajan Lal; 1992 SCC Supp. (1) 335.
5. Learned APP and the learned advocate for the respondent no. 2 strongly opposed the application. They submitted that the incident had taken place as narrated in the FIR. Statements of both those peons have been recorded. They have corroborated those allegations. Considering the nature of the crime, an opportunity ::: Uploaded on - 02/12/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 03/12/2022 21:01:23 ::: 4 Cr. Appln. 1751 / 2021 deserves to be extended to the prosecution to substantiate the allegations.
6. It would be apposite to reproduce section 295 and 295-A of the Indian Penal Code. They read as under:-
"295. Injuring or defiling place of worship with intent to insult the religion of any class. -- Whoever destroys, damages or defiles any place of worship, or any object held sacred by any class of persons with the intention of thereby insulting the religion of any class of persons or with the knowledge that any class of persons is likely to consider such destruction, damage or defilement as an insult to their religion, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
295-A. Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs. -- Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class of citizens of India, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both."
7. Since the applicant is seeking quashment of a crime, we need to proceed by assuming that the incident had taken place as alleged in the FIR and as can be made out from the statements of the witnesses including the statements of the peons who have not been similarly implicated along with the applicant.
::: Uploaded on - 02/12/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 03/12/2022 21:01:23 ::: 5 Cr. Appln. 1751 / 2021
8. The FIR alleges about the applicant having exhorted these two peons to throw away the idol and the other articles and they did so. Their statements recorded by the Investigating Officer under section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure these peons Vanjari and Pawar have stated that the applicant had asked them to throw the idol and the other articles away, and also threatened to demolish the platform but both of them had merely removed those idols and articles and placed them securely beyond the compound wall. If the version of these peons is to be believed, it is eminent that the idol and the other articles meant for performing pooja were not thrown away as alleged in the FIR but were securedly placed elsewhere beyond the compound wall.
9. True it is that there is one more statement recorded under section 161 of the CrPC of one Yogesh Gajanan Bhamre narrating the incident and also alleging about the idol and the articles having been caused to be thrown away but then, when the peons who have not been arrayed as accused, have specifically stated about having placed those things securely beyond the compound wall, one will have to proceed on the premise that that was the true state-of-affairs and it was not an incident wherein these things were just thrown away.
10. We are referring to the afore-mentioned aspects in view of the peculiar wordings of the offences punishable under section 295 ::: Uploaded on - 02/12/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 03/12/2022 21:01:23 ::: 6 Cr. Appln. 1751 / 2021 and 295-A of the Indian Penal Code, which require like any other crime an intention or knowledge and destruction of or defiling of the place of worship. In-fact, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of Ramji Lal Modi Vs. State of Utter Pradesh; AIR 1957 SC 620, section 295-A requires the malicious intention to insult the religion or religious beliefs. If the incident has taken place as indicated herein- above, it is quite apparent that the idols and the other articles meant for performing pooja were lying in the premises of a public office and the applicant merely caused them to be removed from that place and pursuant to his insistence, two peons had securedly placed all these articles beyond the compound wall. All these happenings do not demonstrate that the place of worship or any other object held sacred by any class of people were either damaged or defiled much less with any intention or malicious intention of insulting any religion, which are the necessary concomitants for constituting those offences.
11. Assuming for the sake of arguments that the applicant had orally asked his subordinates / peons to throw away the idol and the other articles, that would, in our considered view not sufficient to indicate that he was intending to insult the religion. He merely wanted the idols to be removed from the place and in all probability, because the peons were reluctant to follow his instructions that he could have used the word "फेका" (throw away).
::: Uploaded on - 02/12/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 03/12/2022 21:01:23 ::: 7 Cr. Appln. 1751 / 2021
12. There is one more aspect. If as has been mentioned in the FIR and as is stated by witness Yogesh Gajanan Bhamre, the incident had taken place on 9th June 2021 and their religious feelings were hurt, its reflection would have been in prompt action to set the criminal law in motion. There is absolutely no explanation in the FIR or even in the statement of that witness as to why they kept mum for a period of 5-6 days. The cause for the delay apart, it would certainly indicate that they may not have harboured any feeling of any insult to their religion then and there when the incident was witnessed by them and must have developed such a feeling subsequently which is nothing but an afterthought.
13. Again, if such was the incident that had taken place in the manner in which it has been made to be believed, we wonder as to how, except the respondent no. 2 and that witness Yogesh Gajanan Bhamre no person has come forward to express the effect of the alleged incident on his religious feelings.
14. In view of the afore-mentioned facts and circumstances, we are of the firm view that the material collected by the Investigating Officer does not reveal all the necessary ingredients for constituting the offence mentioned herein-above. It would be a sheer abuse of the process of law, if the applicant who is a public servant and has merely caused the office premises to be used for setting up of an idol, can be ::: Uploaded on - 02/12/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 03/12/2022 21:01:23 ::: 8 Cr. Appln. 1751 / 2021 allowed to face the charge. The case is clearly covered by the principles laid down in Bhajan Lal (supra).
15. The Application is allowed.
16. The crime no. 183 of 2021 registered with Sakri Police Station, Tq. Sakri, District Dhule for the offence punishable under section 295, 295-A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code is quashed and set aside.
[ ABHAY S. WAGHWASE ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL ]
JUDGE JUDGE
arp/
::: Uploaded on - 02/12/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 03/12/2022 21:01:23 :::