Lack Of Boundaries In Sale Deed Not Fatal To Title If Plot Number & Parent Title Are Sufficiently Identifiable: Calcutta High Court Terror Perception Of Underworld Justifies Delay In Invoking MCOCA; Purely Civil Disputes Can Metamorphose Into Criminal Offence: Bombay High Court Identical Wills Executed By Spouses On Same Day Not Necessarily 'Mutual Wills' Restricting Power Of Alienation: Delhi High Court Written Notice Not Mandatory For Revoking Permission Under Section 41 Presidency Small Cause Courts Act: Gujarat High Court Wife Cannot Maintain Complaint Against Husband Under Senior Citizens Act; Not Intended For Spousal Disputes: Karnataka High Court Mere Presence At Scene Or Facilitation Without Intent To Aid Crime Does Not Amount To Abetment: Delhi High Court Offences Under IT Act Punishable With 3 Years Imprisonment Are Bailable Under Section 77B: Kerala High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail In KCA Data Theft Case Premature Release Can't Be Denied Citing Section 435 CrPC If Sentence Under Central Act Is Already Served: Madras High Court Suppression Of Higher Qualification To Secure Job Reserved For Lower Education Is Foundational Fraud, Sympathy Has No Role: Supreme Court MBBS Admissions | Candidate Using NIOS Marks To Meet 50% Eligibility Cannot Claim State Govt School Quota: Orissa High Court High Court Cannot Exercise Article 227 Power To Strike Off Plaint When Remedy Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC Exists: Madras High Court Section 69 IEA | Onus On Propounder To Lead Secondary Evidence & Remove Suspicious Circumstances If Attesting Witnesses Are Dead: Telangana High Court

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