SHANTABEN BHURABHAI BHURIYA versus ANAND ATHABHAI CHAUDHARI & ORS.

Citation: [2021] 10 S.C.R. 460 · Decided: 26-10-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
460
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 10 S.C.R.
[2021] 10 S.C.R. 460
460
SHANTABEN BHURABHAI BHURIYA
v.
ANAND ATHABHAI CHAUDHARI & ORS.
(Criminal Appeal No. 967 of 2021)
OCTOBER 26, 2021
[M. R. SHAH AND ANIRUDDHA BOSE, JJ.]
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 –  Proviso to s.14 inserted by amendment –
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss.207, 209, 193, 482 –
Offences under Atrocities Act – Second proviso to s.14 confers
powers upon the Special Court constituted u/s.14 also to directly
take cognizance of such offences – Cognizance taken by Magistrate
and thereafter case committed to the Special Court – Criminal
proceedings, if vitiated – High Court quashed and set aside the FIR
as well as order passed by the Magistrate taking cognizance and
issuing summons for offences under IPC as well as Atrocities Act –
On appeal by original informant/complainant, held: It cannot be
said that proviso to s.14 takes away jurisdiction of the Magistrate
to take cognizance and thereafter to commit the case to the Special
Court for trial for the offences under the Atrocities Act – Merely
because the Magistrate had taken cognizance of the offences and
thereafter the case was committed to the Special Court, it cannot be
said that entire criminal proceedings including FIR and charge-
sheet etc. are vitiated – Unless the rights which flow from s.14 of
the Atrocities Act are affected, it cannot be said that the accused is
prejudiced by the Magistrate taking cognizance for the offences
under the Atrocities Act and thereafter committing the case to the
Special Court – Impugned judgment quashing the entire criminal
proceedings against accused for offences u/ss.452, 323, 325, 504,
506(2), 114, IPC and s.3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act, is set aside –
Accused be tried by Special Court having jurisdiction – Penal Code,
1860 – ss.452, 323, 325, 504, 506(2) and 114 – Constitution of
India – Article 226 – Scheduled Castes And The Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention Of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 – s.14 – Object and purpose of – Discussed.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
461
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 – s.14 – Pre and Post Amendment – Discussed
– Scheduled Castes And The Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of
Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Held: Criminal
proceedings cannot be quashed in exercise of powers u/s.482 on
the ground of delay in lodging of FIR.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.197 – If applicable –
Serious allegations against accused-Police Officers of misuse of
powers – Held: It is debatable whether the acts alleged to have
been done by the accused can be said to be part of official duties
and thus if power u/s.197 would apply – Further, lack of sanction
for prosecution u/s.197 can not be a ground to quash criminal
proceedings u/s.482, CrPC.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss.460, 190 – Held: Even
considering s.460, if any Magistrate not empowered to take
cognizance of an offence u/clause (a) or (b) of sub-section(1) of
s.190, takes cognizance, such irregularities do not vitiate
proceedings.
Words & Phrases – “only”, missing in second proviso to s.14
– Intention of legislature – Discussed – Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – Second
proviso to s.14.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 The object and purpose of insertion of Section
14 is to provide speedy trial for the offences under the Atrocities
Act, 1989 and to avoid the delay which was taking place by the
committal of the offence by the Magistrate to the Special Court /
Sessions Court. [Para 8.2][478-G]
Rattiram and Others vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
reported in (2012) 4 SCC 516: [2012] 3 SCR 496 –
relied on.
1.2 Second proviso to Section 14 of the Atrocities Act which
has been inserted by Act 1 of 2016 w.e.f. 26.1.2016 confers power
upon the Special Court so established or specified for the purpose
SHANTABEN BHURABHAI BHURIYA v. ANAND ATHABHAI
CHAUDHARI & ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
462
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 10 S.C.R.
of providing for speedy trial also shall have the power to directly
take cognizance of the offences under the Atrocities Act.
Considering the object and purpose of insertion of proviso to
Section 14, it cannot be said that it is not in conflict with the
Sections 193, 207 and 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973. It cannot be
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.