PRATAPBHAI JILUBHAI PATGIR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
LAWS(GJH)-2021-12-77
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Decided on December 22,2021

Pratapbhai Jilubhai Patgir Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

SWARAN SINGH VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
MANIK TANEJA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
HITESH VERMA VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)By way of this application filed under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the criminal complaint bearing C. R. No. II - 10 of 2019 registered with Ranpur Police Station under Ss. 504 and 506(2) of Indian Penal Code , Sec. 3(1)(r) and 3(2) (va) of the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short, "the Atrocities Act").
(2.)The applicant states that he is the Sarpanch of Village : Aniyadi Kathi, Taluka : Ranpur, District : Botad and that respondent No.2-original complainant is his political rival. In order to harass the applicant, the impugned complaint has been filed. The applicant states that the respondent- complainant has committed various acts, which are detrimental to the public health of villagers and which have violated the rights of the villagers. The applicant alleges that the respondent-complainant had procured the survey details of the village and had utilized the water for agricultural work in his own field. The applicant, being the Sarpanch, had confronted him about his illegal act. Thus, keeping the grudge, the complaint has been filed mainly because the respondent- complainant is his political rival and secondly, the applicant had confronted him about his illegal act; and thirdly, the respondent-complainant wanted to instill fear amongst the villagers by lodging the complaint so that he could carry on with his illegal activities.
(3.)Learned advocate Mr. V.K. Anadjiwala for the applicant submits that the alleged act has not occurred in the presence of the respondent-complainant. The ingredients to attract the offence under the Atrocities Act are not attracted in the present case. No offence has been committed in the presence of the respondent-complainant nor in public view or in a public place. The impugned complaint has been filed on hear- say basis. He states that no such incident has even occurred. Only to exert pressure on the applicant being the Sarpanch of the village and to create an atmosphere of fear, the impugned complaint has been filed.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.