1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application No.2613 of 2008 (Shri Dashrath Sakru Jadhav and others v. State of Maharashtra and another) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions : Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Shri H. Dhumale, Advocate for Applicants. Shri D.B. Patel, APP for Non-Applicant No.1. CORAM : R.C. Chavan, J. DATE : 31st March, 2009 This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR bearing No.61 of 2008 of Police Station Pusad (Rural). It is the applicants' case that the applicants have been cultivating the field of the father of non-applicant No.2 on a lease-deed executed by non-applicant No.2's father. It was alleged by non-applicant No.2 in the FIR, which has been challenged in this case, that on 8-6-2008 at about 8 a.m. when they were present in the field for sowing operation, the present applicants came to the field and tried to drive them out of the field, contending that they had paid money to non-applicant No.2's father for cultivation of the field. The assault launched by the applicants led to injuries to the complainant/non- applicant No.2 as also his mother. On a report by him, an offence was registered under Sections 324 and 506 read with 2 Section 34 of the Penal Code. The complainant's statement was recorded on the same day and it appears that subsequently an offence punishable under Section 3(i)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act was also added. After completion of investigation, a chargesheet has been filed alleging that the applicants committed offences punishable under Sections 324, 436 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code and Section 3(i)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Though the applicants have sought quashing of the FIR in entirety, the learned counsel for the applicants restricted his arguments to the FIR in so far as it relates to offence punishable under Section 3(i)(x) of the Atrocities Act. Now the first FIR is not in respect of this offence. As far as FIR dated 8-6-2008 is concerned, it is only in respect of offences punishable under Section 324 and 506 of the Penal Code about which the learned counsel for the applicants does not have a grievance right now. Therefore, there is no question of quashing FIR, since it does not at all refer to offence punishable under Section 3(i)(x) of the Prevention of Atrocities Act. As far as offence punishable under Section 3(i)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is concerned, it was added subsequently and it forms a part of the chargesheet, which has not been challenged. Since the chargesheet has been filed, as far as the allegation about offence punishable under Section 3(i)(x) of 3 the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is concerned, the applicants' remedy of seeking discharge from competent Court is open. Therefore, no relief can be granted in this case. Thus the application is rejected. Judge. Pdl.