1 apl1294.22.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.1294 OF 2022 Satish s/o Madhukar Chavan Aged about 43 years, Occ: Govt.Servant R/o Vyankatesh Apartment, Ground Floor E/2, beside Madhada Hospital, Jatharpeth, Akola, Dist. Akola. ....APPLICANT ...V E R S U S... 1. State of Maharashtra Through PSO Railway, Akola District Akola. 2. Rahul Shripatrao Ahire Aged about 63 years, Occ: Retired, R/o Vrundavan Nagar, Akola, Dist. Akola. ...NON-APPLICANTS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Mahesh Rai, Advocate for applicant. Shri H.D. Futane, APP for non-applicant no.2. Ms Sonali Khobragade, Advocate for non-applicant no.2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM:- M.W. CHANDWANI, J. DATED :- 11.09.2024 ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. Admit. 2. The applicant seeks quashing of First Information Report bearing Crime No.3003/2014 registered with Police Station, Railway Akola for the offences punishable under Section 3(1)(r) 2026:BHC-NAG:12211-DB 2 apl1294.22.odt and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Charge-sheet No.1/2015 filed in Sessions Case No.159/2015 before the learned 3rd District Judge-2 (Special Judge), Akola on account of settlement. 3. The charge-sheet depicts that the applicant is working as Clerk in the parcel office at Railway Station, Akola; whereas, non-applicant no.2 was the Chief Parcel Supervisor at the same place. It is alleged in the FIR that since the applicant was not diligent in his work and used to commit mistakes, he was issued various memos by non-applicant no.2. On 28.02.2014, when non- applicant no.2 was working in his office, the applicant came there and abused non-applicant no.2 in the name of his caste after he came to know that non-applicant no.2 has issued a memo against him. Therefore, on the complaint of non-applicant no.2, the aforesaid offence came to be registered against the applicant. 4. Non-applicant no.2 is present in the Court today. He has been duly identified by his counsel. Non-applicant no.2 has filed his affidavit. It is contended that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. Non-applicant no.2 further contends in his affidavit that he does not want to prosecute the 3 apl1294.22.odt applicant and he has no objection if the FIR and the consequential proceedings are quashed. 5. It appears that the applicant and non-applicant no.2 are working in the parcel office of Central Railway Division at Railway Station, Akola. It also appears that the applicant was working under the supervision of non-applicant no.2 and there was a pre-existing dispute between them. Since, non-applicant no.2 had issued various memos to the applicant on account of his negligent behaviour as well as his repeated mistakes at work, the relationship between the applicant and non-applicant no.2 was strained and therefore, the present incident needs to be considered in the backdrop of the same. 6. In this context, the Supreme Court in the case of Ramawatar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, reported in (2022) 13 SCC 635, in para no. 17 has held as under:- "17. On the other hand, where it appears to the Court that the offence in question, although covered under the SC/ST Act, is primarily private or civil in nature, or where the alleged offence has not been committed on account of the caste of the victim, or where the continuation of the legal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law, 4 apl1294.22.odt the Court can exercise its powers to quash the proceedings. On similar lines, when considering a prayer for quashing on the basis of a compromise/settlement, if the Court is satisfied that the underlying objective of the Act would not be contravened or diminished even if the felony in question goes unpunished, the mere fact that the offence is covered under a 'special statute' would not refrain this Court or the High Court, from exercising their respective powers under Article 142 of the Constitution or Section 482 Cr.P.C." 7. The present dispute is private in nature and not a heinous one. It also does not involve any issue affecting the society at large. Since, the parties have settled the dispute out of the Court and non-applicant no.2 does not want to prosecute the applicants for the alleged offences, the possibility of the prosecution culminating into conviction appears to be remote. In this scenario, continuation of the criminal proceedings would serve no fruitful purpose. Therefore, a case is made out for exercising the inherent powers of this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS (old Sec.482 of Cr.P.C.) to secure the ends of justice and to prevent abuse of the process of law. Hence, the following order is passed: 5 apl1294.22.odt (i) The criminal application is allowed. (ii) First Information Report bearing Crime No.3003/2014 registered with Police Station, Railway Akola for the offences punishable under Section 3(1) (r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Charge-sheet No.1/2015 filed in Sessions Case No.159/2015 before the learned 3rd District Judge-2 (Special Judge), Akola against the applicant are hereby quashed and set aside subject to the applicants depositing costs of ₹10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) to “Public Welfare Fund” with Union Bank of India, High Court Branch, Nagpur having Account No.129712010001014 and IFSC Code UBIN0812978 within a period of two weeks from the date of this order. (iii) The application stands disposed of. (M.W. CHANDWANI) Wagh Signed by: Mr. S.R. Wagh Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 15/09/2026 18:47:27