Court Finds Prima Facie Evidence Supporting Charges Under IPC and Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act
In a significant judgment, the Calcutta High Court, presided over by Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta, dismissed the criminal revision application filed by petitioner Suranjan Mandal, seeking the quashing of criminal proceedings initiated against him under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
The case arose from an FIR registered in May 2022, where the complainant alleged that Mandal and another accused abused him with casteist remarks and physically assaulted him, an incident purportedly witnessed by locals. The FIR included serious charges under sections 341, 323, 325, 307, 506, and 34 of the IPC, along with sections 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act.
The defense argued that the allegations were baseless, lacking essential ingredients to constitute an offense under the SC/ST Act, and stemmed from a personal vendetta. They emphasized the absence of specific intent to insult or humiliate the complainant in public view and pointed out discrepancies in the investigation, such as the omission of certain IPC sections in the charge sheet.
However, the State, represented by senior government advocates, countered these claims by presenting the case diary and witness statements, which they argued provided sufficient prima facie evidence against Mandal. They asserted that the investigation revealed the occurrence of the alleged offenses in a public place, thus satisfying the statutory requirements for the charges under the SC/ST Act.
Justice Gupta, after a detailed analysis, concluded that the allegations did meet the basic ingredients of the offenses under the relevant provisions. The court highlighted that the incident occurred in a public space, fulfilling the criteria of being within public view, and noted the presence of eyewitnesses corroborating the complainant's account. The judgment referenced relevant Supreme Court precedents to support its findings.
The court underscored the necessity of a trial to ascertain the truth of the allegations, dismissing the petitioner's plea as lacking merit. The decision reinforced the legal principle that the inherent powers of the court under Section 482 of the CrPC should not be used to quash proceedings at an initial stage without a thorough examination of evidence during trial.
The judgment thus paves the way for the continuation of the trial against Mandal and his co-accused, emphasizing the judiciary's role in ensuring justice and upholding the rights of vulnerable communities under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act.
Bottom Line:
Quashing of proceedings under Section 482 CrPC - Allegations under IPC and Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Prima facie evidence supports charges - Application dismissed due to lack of merit.
Statutory provision(s): Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973; Sections 341, 323, 325, 307, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Suranjan Mandal @ Suranjoy Mandal v. State of West Bengal, (Calcutta) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2833989
