By this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (the Code), the applicants - original accused No.7 and 8 seek quashing of the first information report registered vide Siddhpur Police Station I - C. R. No.206/2008.
The second respondent - first informant lodged the above referred first information report against the applicants and six others alleging commission of the offences punishable under sections 323, 337, 504, 506(2) IPC and under section 3(1)(10) of the Schedule Castes & Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Mr.
Keyur Vyas, learned advocate for the applicants invited attention to the averments made in the first information report to submit that no role has been attributed to the applicants herein and that only in the concluding part of the first information report, it has been alleged that earlier, the applicants herein were inciting the Thakors against them and were instigating them to quarrel with them. It was submitted that in the entire incident in relation to which the first information report has been lodged, there is no reference to the presence of the applicants herein, nor is any involvement of the applicants alleged. It was submitted that by merely stating therein that earlier, the applicants herein had instigated the Thakors against the people of the first informant's community, the applicants are sought to be roped into the offences in question. Attention was also invited to the judgement rendered by the learned Special Judge & Sessions Judge, at Patan in Special Case (Atrocity) No.1 of 2010 and Special Case (Atrocity) No.29 of 2009 to submit that the rest of the accused against whom the overtacts have been alleged, have been acquitted after a full-fledged trial. Under the circumstances, when the main accused have been acquitted, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is permitted to continue qua the present applicants.
This Court has also heard Mr. K. P. Raval, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the first respondent. Despite service of rule, there is no appearance on behalf of the second respondent.
A perusal of the first information report shows that the allegations made therein are to the effect that on 20.10.2008, in the evening when the first informant was sitting at his residence, in connection with an incident that had taken place in the morning, one Arvindji, Mangaji Khengarji Thakor, Badarji Vaktaji Thakor, Gati Savdhanji Thakor, Barkuji Talaji Thakor and two sons of Arvindji came together and abused him in relation to his caste and started saying that, kill him and took pieces of bricks lying near by and threw the same on his house whereby he sustained injuries on his right leg, on his back and on his left hand and that his brother Kanubhai Mavjibhai Solanki who came in between was injured on his head and on his side and other women and persons were also injured. Since the injuries were simple, they had not gone for treatment. That thereafter, some other persons of the locality having come there, they had stopped throwing stones and after hurling abuses in respect of their caste and threatening to kill them, the accused had gone away. Thereafter, it is stated that prior to the said quarrel, the applicants herein had come to the locality of the Thakors and had instigated the Thakors to quarrel with them. That at the instigation of applicants, the above referred persons had quarreled with them and thrown stones on them and had hurled abuses at them. On the basis of the aforesaid allegation, the applicants are stated to have committed the offences noted hereinabove.
On a plain reading of the allegations made in the first information report, it is apparent that insofar as the actual incident that is alleged to have taken place is concerned, the applicants herein had no role to play. There is not even a whisper in the first information report to the effect that the applicants were present at the time of the offence. The only allegation against the applicants is that on an earlier occasion, the applicants had instigated the Thakors to quarrel with the persons belonging to the community of the first informant.
It may be noted that apart from the fact that no overt act has been attributed to the applicants, insofar as the remaining accused are concerned, the police pursuant to the investigation carried out by them in connection with the above referred first information report, had submitted charge-sheets which came to be registered as Special Case (Atro.) No.1/10 and Special Case (Atro.) No.29/09 and a full-fledged trial had taken place, which culminated into a judgment and order dated 10.08.2010 whereby the remaining accused were acquitted. Thus, the all principal accused who are alleged to have been present at the time of the incident and perpetrated the offence in question, allegedly at the instigation of the applicants, have been acquitted Under the circumstances, when the main accused have been acquitted of the offences alleged, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is permitted to continue qua the present applicants against whom only a passing reference has been made in the first information report. In the light of the acquittal of the other co-accused as discussed hereinabove, there are no chances of a conviction being recorded against the applicants. Under the circumstances, if the proceedings are permitted to continue against the present applicants, the same would be an exercise in futility. No useful purpose would, therefore, be served by permitting the proceedings to continue and would be a waste of time. This is, therefore, a fit case for exercise of powers under section 482 of the Code.
For the foregoing reasons, the application succeeds and is, accordingly, allowed. The first information report registered vide Siddhpur Police Station I - C. R. No.206/2008 qua the present applicants is hereby quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute, accordingly.
[HARSHA DEVANI, J.] parmar* Top