[1.0] As common question of law and facts arise, both these Criminal Miscellaneous Applications are decided and disposed of by this common judgment and order. [1.1] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.5561/1999 has been preferred by the applicant herein – original accused No.3, a practicing advocate at Dwarka, to quash and set aside the impugned FIR being C.R. No.I30/1999 lodged before the Okha Police Station, Jamnagar for the offence punishable under Section 3(4)(5)(8) of The Scheduled Castes and The Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “the Atrocities Act”).
[1.2] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.5563/1999 has been preferred by the very applicant to quash and set aside the impugned FIR being C.R. No.I31/1999 lodged before the Okha Police Station, Jamnagar for the offence punishable under Section 3(4)(5)(8) of the Atrocities Act.
[2.0] Respondent No.1 herein, in both these applications, have lodged the impugned First Information Reports being C.R. No.I30/1999 and 31/1999 against the applicant – original accused No.3 and other accused persons for the offence punishable under Section 3(4)(5)(8) of the Atrocities Act alleging interalia that both of them are allotted and having plots just adjacent to Vishwakarma Housing Society in which original accused Nos.1 and 2 are residing and the same was not liked by the accused persons, original accused Nos.1 and 2 have instituted civil suits before the Civil Court which have been dismissed. Thus, it is alleged that the accused persons have instituted false, malacious and vexatious suit against the respective complainants who are the member of the Schedule Caste and therefore, it is alleged that accused persons have committed offence punishable under Section 3(4)(5)(8) of the Atrocities Act. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid FIRs, the applicant herein – original accused No.3, a practicing lawyer at Dwarka, who filed the aforesaid suits for and on behalf of the original plaintiffs – other accused persons, has preferred the present Criminal Miscellaneous Applications under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
[3.0] Shri Dipen Desai, learned advocate has stated at the Bar that he has instruction to appear on behalf of applicant in both the applications and that he undertakes to file vakalatnama within a period of 10 days from today.
[3.1] Shri Dipen Desai, learned advocate appearing for the applicant has vehemently submitted that as such except filing the respective suits on behalf of the original plaintiffs – other accused persons, there is no specific role attributed to the applicant herein. It is submitted that by mere filing the suit as an advocate, it cannot be said that he has committed any offence as alleged. It is submitted that except acting as an advocate on behalf of the plaintiffs, he has not played any other role and as such there are no other allegations and averments in the FIRs and therefore, to continue the criminal proceedings against the applicant would be abuse of process of law and Court and therefore, it is requested to exercise powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and to quash and set aside the impugned FIRs so far as applicant herein – original accused No.3 is concerned.
[4.0] Shri R.M. Parmar, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respective original complainants has submitted that it can be said that the applicant is also a party to such frivolous and vexatious proceedings, may be the suits are filed by other persons and therefore, it is requested not to exercise powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
[5.0] Shri Dabhi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State has requested to pass appropriate order considering the facts and circumstances of the case.
[6.0] Heard the learned advocates appearing for respective parties at length and considered the averments and allegations in the respective complaints and even if the same are considered as they are, it cannot be said that the applicant, who was at the relevant time a practicing lawyer at Dwarka who has filed the suit for other accused persons, can be said to have committed the offence as alleged. On mere filing of the suit by the plaintiffs, it cannot be said that the advocate has committed any offence as alleged. At the most it can be said that plaintiffs who instituted the proceedings can be said to have committed the offence as alleged. No other allegations have been made against the applicant by which it can be said that the applicant as an advocate has committed any offence as alleged for offence punishable under Section 3(4)(5)(8) of the Atrocities Act. Under the circumstances, it appears to the Court that to continue the criminal proceedings against the applicant would be abuse of process of law and Court and therefore, this is a fit case to exercise powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
[7.0] In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, both these applications succeed and the impugned FIR being C.R. Nos.I30/1999 and 31/1999 registered with Okha Police Station, Jamnagar are hereby quashed and set aside so far as the applicant herein – original accused No.3 is concerned. However, the same shall be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the original complainant as well as the prosecution against other accused persons. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent in each of the applications.
(M.R. Shah, J.) menon