Madhya Pradesh High Court
Antu Tiwari @ Praveen vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr on 30 August, 2017
1 MCRC No.7287/2017
(Antu Tiwari @ Praveen & Ors. vs. State of M.P. & Anr.)
30.08.2017
Shri Amit Sharma, Counsel for the applicants.
Shri Prakhar Dhengula, Public Prosecutor for the
respondent No.1/State.
Shri Anshu Gupta, Counsel for the respondent No.2. This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashment of the FIR on the ground of compromise. The Police Station Sevda, District Datia has registered the FIR No.69/2017 against the applicants on the report of the respondent No.2 for offence under Sections 323, 294, 506 of IPC and under Section 3(1)(r)
(s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
It is submitted by the counsel for the applicants that the parties have compromised their dispute and accordingly this Court by order dated 16.8.2017 had directed the parties to appear before the Principal Registrar of this Court for verification of factum of compromise.
After recording the statements of the witnesses, the Principal Registrar of this Court has given the following report:
"Statements of complainant/ respondent No.2 Durga Prasad & victims Smt. Bhuribai & Ramkali and accused/petitioner No.1 Antu Tiwari @ Praveen, No.2 Guddu Tiwari @ Pramod @ Pramod and No.3 Aman Tiwari are recorded matter perused, inquired and heard as to factum of compromise.
After verifying from parties present before me that they have arrived at 2 MCRC No.7287/2017 compromise voluntarily without any fear or force.
According to Sec. 320 of CRPC the offences U/s 323, 294, 506 of IPC are compoundable, But offence U/s 3(1)(r)& 3(1)(s) of SC/ST Act are not compoundable"
This Court in the case of Monu @ Ranu Kushwah & Ors. vs. State of M.P. & Anr. by order dated 30.11.2016 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 11891/2016 has held that the proceedings initiated for offence under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act cannot be quashed on the ground of compromise. It is held by this Court in the case of Monu @ Ranu Kushwah & Ors. (supra) as under:-
"10. We may profitably refer to Articles 15 and 17 of the Constitution of India. Article 17 of the Constitution of India reads as under:-
"17. Abolition of Untouchability.- "Untouchability" is abolished and its practice in any form is forbidden The enforcement of any disability arising out of "Untouchability" shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law."
* * * * * *
13. Thus, it is clear that the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is special statute enacted with an intention to eradicate untouchability and to make stringent provisions in case any offence is committed against the member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe.
14. The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 was enacted because in spite of various measures adopted to improve the socio-economic condition of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, they had remained vulnerable. They are subjected to various offences, indignities, 3 MCRC No.7287/2017 humiliations and harassments only because of the fact that they belong to either Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes. When they assert their rights and resist untouchability, the vested interest tried to cow them down and terrorize them. Sometimes the members of the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes who are in the occupation of the agricultural lands, become victims of attacks by a vested interest, therefore, the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 was enacted as it was considered necessary that not only the word 'atrocities' should be defined but stringent measures should be introduced to provide for higher punishments for committing such atrocities. Therefore, any act which is punishable under Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has to be dealt with seriously and cannot be treated at par with offences punishable under the Panel Code. Furthermore, in order to achieve the object of protecting the dignity and rights of the members of a Scheduled Castes and a Scheduled Tribes, certain amendments have been introduced by the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 making more stringent provisions. Thus, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is a special statute which has been enacted with the specific purpose of protecting the dignity, integrity as well as the rights of the members of the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes.
* * * * * *
19. The fact that the applicants had called the complainant as "adiwasin" clearly show that they had committed this offence intentionally to humiliate and insult a member of a Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in a place within a public view. The allegations made in the FIR also clearly shows that the applicants had intentionally touched the complainant with evil intentions who belongs to a Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes. In such circumstances, it cannot be held that the offences committed by the applicants were individual in nature and not against the society. So far as the order on which the 4 MCRC No.7287/2017 counsel for the applicants has placed reliance are concerned suffice it to say that those orders have been passed in the facts and circumstances of that case."
Considering the fact that the offence under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has also been registered, the application for quashment of the FIR on the ground of compromise is dismissed.
At this stage, the counsel for the applicants seeks permission of this Court to file a separate petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking quashment of the FIR on merits.
Although the present petition was initially filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashment of the FIR but subsequently the prayer was confined for quashment of the FIR on the ground of compromise. Therefore, under these circumstances, the counsel for the applicants is permitted to file a fresh properly constituted application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashment of the FIR.
With aforesaid liberty, the application is dismissed.
(G.S. Ahluwalia)
(alok) Judge