CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints Minimum Wages Cannot Be Ignored While Determining Just Compensation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Re-Fixes Income of Deceased Mason, Enhances Interest to 7.5% 34 IPC | Common Intention Is Inferred From Manner Of Attack, Weapons Carried And Concerted Conduct: Allahabad High Court Last Date of Section 4 Publication Is Crucial—Error in Date Cannot Depress Market Value: Bombay High Court Enhances Compensation in Beed Land Acquisition Appeals Order 26 Rule 10-A CPC | Rarest of Rare: When a Mother Denies Her Own Child: Rajasthan High Court Orders DNA Test to Decide Maternity Acquittal Is Not a Passport Back to Uniform: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable in NDPS Case Despite Trial Court Verdict Limitation Under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Cannot Be Ignored — But Section 473 Keeps the Door Open in the Interest of Justice: P&H HC Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness

Criminal Proceedings under SCST Act - Abuse of Process of Law – Quashed - SC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On dated 05Feb2023, Supreme Court (B. VENKATESWARAN & ORS. Vs. P. BAKTHAVATCHALAM) quashed a criminal complaint and summoning order under SCST Act held that a private dispute between parties regarding illegal construction converted into criminal proceedings. Initiation of criminal proceedings under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 appears to be an abuse of process of law.

The respondent filed a private complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate for the alleged offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The Special Court took cognizance of the case and issued summons to the accused persons. The accused persons filed a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the High Court to quash the criminal proceedings, but the High Court dismissed the application.

The appellant filed an appeal against the impugned judgment passed by the High Court of Madras, in which the High Court refused to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against the appellant for the offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

Supreme Court observed that the initiation of the criminal proceedings against the appellant for the offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 was an abuse of process of law and that the allegations in the complaint did not mention any deliberate and willful obstruction or interference with the enjoyment of the respondent's right on his property. The court found that the complaint was a conversion of a civil dispute into a criminal dispute. The court noted that prior to the filing of the complaint, the temple was already in existence and that the complainant had filed writ petitions before the Madras High Court regarding the same issue.

Court held that a private dispute between parties regarding illegal construction converted into criminal proceedings and Initiation of criminal proceedings under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 appears to be an abuse of process of law. The allegations in the complaint do not suggest that the accused deliberately and willfully obstructed or interfered with the complainant's enjoyment of his property knowing that the complainant belongs to SC/ST. The case appears to be a civil dispute rather than a criminal one, with the temple being in existence for many years. The High Court's decision to dismiss the writ petition is unsustainable and the criminal proceedings initiated against the accused deserve to be quashed and set aside. The appeal allowed and the criminal proceedings initiated against the accused quashed and set aside.

VENKATESWARAN & ORS. APPELLANT(S) VS BAKTHAVATCHALAM RESPONDENT(S)

Latest Legal News