IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.29915 of 2007 1. NARENDRA SINGH @ NARENDRA KUMAR SINGH, SON OF KAMESHWAR SINGH. 2. KAMESHWAR SINGH, SON OF LATE MOD NARAYAN SINGH. BOTH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-KHARHARI, P.S. KARGAHAR, DISTRICT-ROHTAS. ………………………………………………………………....PETITIONERS. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. BALCHAND RAM, SON OF BASAWAN RAM, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-KHARHARI, P.S. KARGAHAR, DISTRICT-ROHTAS. ……………………………………………………….OPPOSITE PARTIES. ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Senior Advocate. For the State : Mr. M.N. Jha, A.P.P. For O.P. No.2 : Mr. K.D. Singh, Advocate. ---------- 3. 10.11.2008. Heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners as also the learned counsel for O.P. No.2 and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioners against whom cognizance has been taken under Sections 341, 323, 504/34 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(v)(ix) and (x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to as “the SC/ST Act”) by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram by order dated 16.5.2007 passed in Kargahar P.S. Case No.111 of 2006 have prayed for quashing of that part of the order involving the SC/ST Act as no offence thereunder appears to have been made out from the allegations. The provisions of Section 3(1)(v) of the SC/ST Act reveals that there has to be actual dispossession from land or premises - 2 - belonging to the members of Schedule Castes or Scheduled Tribes or interference with the enjoyment thereof. Unless this part of the Section is made out a prosecution for commission of offence under that Section is not maintainable. The provisions of Section 3(1)(ix) provides for prosecution when a person not being a member of a Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribe gives any false or frivolous information to any public servant and thereby causes such public servant to use his lawful power to the injury or annoyance of a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. No such allegation appears to have been made in the fardbeyan of the informant. For an offence under Section 3(1) (x) of the SC/ST Act, it is necessary that the offensive words must be used by the accused persons not only in public view but in the presence of some members of the public as distinguished from friends and relatives. In the instant case the offensive words were pronounced in the open fields of the informant but there is no indication therein to show the presence of any member of the public. From the allegations made by the informant, efforts were allegedly being made by the accused persons to stop the informant from cultivating his lands. This apparently would not fall within the ambit of an offence under Section 3 (1) of the SC/ST Act. From the discussions made above, it is apparent from the allegations made by the informant, no offence under any of the sub Sections of Section 3(i) of the SC/ST Act appear to have been made - 3 - out against the petitioners. In that view of the matter, the impugned order taking cognizance under the provisions of the SC/ST Act is hereby quashed. However, the cognizance in respect of the offences under the Penal Code appear to have been made out and the trial will continue thereunder. In the result, the application is allowed in part to the extent that the cognizance under the various Sections of the SC/ST Act is quashed and the trial will continue in respect of the offences under the Penal Code. P.S. (Abhijit Sinha,J)