JUDGEMENT
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL,J. -
(1.)This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 5th May, 2017 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Application No.1015 of 2016.
(2.)On 20th November, 2017 the following order was passed by this Court:
"Heard learned counsel for the parties. Certain adverse remarks were recorded against respondentno. 2-Bhaskar Karbhari Gaidwad by the Principal and Headof the Department of the College of Pharmacy where respondent no. 2 was employed. Respondent No. 2 sought sanction for his prosecution under the provisions of theScheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and for certain other connected offences. The said matter was dealt with by the petitionerand sanction was declined. This led to another complaintby the respondent no. 2 against the petitioner under thesaid provisions. The quashing of the said complaint hasbeen declined by the High Court. The question which has arisen in the course of consideration of this matter is whether any unilateralallegation of mala fide can be ground to prosecute officerswho dealt with the matter in official capacity and if suchallegation is falsely made what is protection available against such abuse. Needless to say that if the allegation is to be acted upon, the proceedings can result in arrest or prosecution of the person and have serious consequences on his right to liberty even on a false complaint which may not be intended by law meant for protection of a bona fide victim. The question is whether this will be just and fair procedureunder Article 21 of the Constitution of India or there can be procedural safeguards so that provisions of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 are not abused for extraneous considerations. Issue notice returnable on 10th January, 2018. In the meanwhile, there shall be stay of further proceedings. Issue notice to Attorney General of India also as the issueinvolves interpretation of a central statute. Mr. Amrendra Sharan, learned senior counsel is requestedto assist the Court as amicus. Mr. Sharan will be at libertyto have assistance of Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, Advocate. ... ..."
(3.)Though certain facts are stated while framing the question already noted, some more facts may be noted. The appellant herein is the original accused in the case registered at City Police Station, Karad for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(ix), 3(2)(vi) and 3(2)(vii) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (the Atrocities Act) as also Sections 182, 192, 193, 203 and 219 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). He was serving as Director of Technical Education in the State of Maharashtra at the relevant time.