( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 825 OF 2009 Mohd. Aziz Chandkha Faruki and others. PETITIONERS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and another. RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. D.M. Shinde, advocate for the petitioners. ..... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 11th September, 2009] PER COURT : 1. This petition is filed for quashing of the FIR on basis of which crime No. 61/2009 has been registered by Mahur Police Station for offence punishable under section 3 (1) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, “the Atrocities Act”). The petitioners also seek interim relief by way of anticipatory bail. 2. Heard learned counsel for sufficient time. ( 2 ) 3. The recitals of the FIR prima facie indicate that the complainant is agriculturist. There is dispute between his uncle by name Vinod Shende and the family of the petitioners. His uncle is on friendly terms with one Babukhan s/o Chandkhan and cultivates the piece of land owned by said Babukha. On that ground, previously, a dispute had arisen between the petitioners and his uncle which was resolved in a meeting dated 30-06-2009. Due to intervention of the Committee of the villagers called “--------------”. The complainant alleged that on 2nd July, 2009, he was returning with his wife in an auto-rickshaw from hospital towards village Takli, the auto-rickshaw was intercepted by the petitioners and thereafter, the petitioner No. 1 dragged him out. The petitioners were armed with weapons like iron angle and rods. They assaulted him on the ground of his caste. He is member of Scheduled Caste. 4. The learned advocate for the petitioner would submit that no role is attributed to the other two (2) petitioners in respect of utterances stated in the FIR ( 3 ) regarding insult of the complainant on the ground of his being member of Scheduled Caste. At this juncture, mere recitals in the FIR cannot be taken into consideration. The matter is under investigation. The investigating officer is yet to collect the evidence. It prima facie appears that the three petitioners together obstructed the auto-rickshaw in which the complainant was traveling and thereafter, he was wriggled out and assaulted. The sharing of common intention in such a situation is required to be determined after collecting necessary material during course of investigation. Considering these aspects, at premature stage, it cannot be said that no case is absolutely made out. It is stated that the complainant was injured and thereafter, was required to be shifted to the hospital. At fag end of the FIR, the complainant has made general allegations indicating that all the three petitioners insulted him on the ground of his being member of Scheduled Caste and they abused him. 5. Having regard to the nature of allegations in the FIR, at this premature stage, I find it difficult to ( 4 ) quash the same and, therefore, the petition is not considered on merits. The petition is accordingly dismissed. It is made clear that the observations made above be not considered while deciding any other matter including the anticipatory bail. [ V.R. KINGAONKAR ] JUDGE NPJ/criwp825-09