IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.43049 of 2007 GUDDU CHOUDHARY S/O- HARISCHANDRA CHOUDHARY, R/O- VILLAGE- PUTAIE, P.S.- MANIGACHCHI, DISTRICT- DARBHANGA. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. RAM BILASH RAM, S/O- RAM KHELAWAN RAM, R/O- VILLAGE- PUTAIE, P.S.- MANIGACHCHI, DISTRICT- DARBHANGA For the petitioner : Mr. Gajendra Kumar Jha, Advocate. For the State : Mr. B.P. Singh, APP ----------- 3 20.08.2010 Heard both sides. Petitioner is aggrieved by part of the order dated 6.1.2007 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga in Manigachchi P.S. case no. 74 of 2006 whereby he has taken cognizance under Section 3(1) (x) of the S.C./S.T. Act against the petitioner and five others. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits before this Court that so far as other offences under diverse sections of Indian Penal Code are concerned, the petitioner, does not raise any dispute. An F.I.R. was lodged by the informant giving rise to Manigachchi P.S. case no. 74 of 2006 alleging therein that on the relevant night, the accused persons were involved in cutting/uprooting the hand-pump fixed close to the house of the informant. The sister of the informant came out of the house and protested whereafter the accused persons assaulted her with fists and slaps and also tied her hands. An alarm was raised which attracted several villagers. It is contended that even going by every words spelt out in the F.I.R., no case under Section 3(1)(x) of the Act is made 2 out and as such cognizance order in so far as the same relates to offence punishable under S.C./S.T. Act is concerned, is bad in law as the same is result of non-application of mind. Learned APP, on the other hand, submits that there is allegation that the sister of the informant was assaulted by the accused persons whereafter the villagers also arrived at the place of occurrence. I have heard the submission advanced on behalf of the parties. Section 3(1)(x) of the Act reads as under: “3(1)(x) intentionally insults or intimidates with intent or humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in any place within public view;” A bare perusal of the provision would indicate that the prime intention of accused in such matter should be to humiliate a member of S.C./S.T. category in any place within public view only because he or she belongs to SC/ST castes. This is the prime ingredient of the said offence. In the present case, the sister of the informant, as per prosecution case, had objected to up- rooting/taking away of the hand pump allegedly belonging to the informant which enraged the accused(s) which resulted in thrashing of the sister of the informant. This Court, in view of the averments/allegations made in the F.I.R. is not able to gather therefrom that she was insulted, humiliated and/or assaulted only because she belonged to S.C./S.T. caste. This is a special statute and, therefore, has to be construed strictly in terms of the provisions made therein. The 3 purpose of the Act is to prevent the commission of offence of atrocities against the members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Present case appears to be a case of assault when objected to by the sister of the informant. I am thus convinced that the cognizance taken under Section 3(1)(x) of the Act is not sustainable in law. This Court further reminds itself of the fact that only because of application of this section, the case may be required to be committed to a Special Court and a cumbersome procedure has to be undergone thereto. All in all, the application is fit to be allowed and is allowed. The order impugned dated 6.1.2007 in so far as the same relates to Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST Act is quashed and set aside. It is made clear that the cognizance so far as diverse sections of Indian Penal Code is concerned, the same shall proceed in accordance with law. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )