Case Note & Summary
The case involves two Criminal Revision Applications filed by the applicants (accused) against an order dated 28th July 2014 passed by the Special Court at Bombay in Special Case No.16 of 2013, rejecting their discharge application under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). The applicants were charged with offences under Sections 294, 506(II), 509 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) read with Section 34 IPC, and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Atrocities Act). The case arose from a report lodged by respondent no.2 with the Chembur Police Station, which was treated as an FIR. After investigation, a chargesheet was filed. The applicants sought discharge primarily on the ground that the allegations were false and that the first informant had a habit of making false allegations. The learned counsel for the applicants, Ms. Kiran Tiwari, argued that the allegations were false and referred to previous cases filed by the informant. The learned counsel for respondent no.2, Mr. Rizwan Merchant, and the learned APP, Mrs. M.R. Tidke, opposed the revision applications. The court, after hearing the parties, held that at the stage of discharge under Section 227 CrPC, the court is not required to examine the truth or falsity of the allegations. The only consideration is whether a prima facie case is made out. The court found that the allegations in the FIR, if taken at face value, disclosed the ingredients of the offences alleged, including the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act. Therefore, the court dismissed both revision applications, upholding the order of the Special Court rejecting the discharge application.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Discharge under Section 227 CrPC - Prima Facie Case - The court held that at the stage of framing of charges, the court is not required to examine the truth or falsity of the allegations; only a prima facie case is sufficient to proceed. The applicants' contention that the allegations were false was not a ground for discharge under Section 227 CrPC. (Paras 5-6) B) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 3(1)(x) - Ingredients - The court noted that the charge under Section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act requires an intentional insult or intimidation with intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe in a public place. The allegations in the FIR, if taken at face value, disclosed the ingredients of the offence. (Para 3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the applicants are entitled to discharge under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on the ground that the allegations made by the first informant are false.
Final Decision
Both Criminal Revision Applications are dismissed.
Law Points
- Discharge under Section 227 CrPC
- Prima facie case
- Truth of allegations not to be examined at discharge stage
- Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST Act
