The Telangana High Court quashed an FIR against two Civil Judges accused under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, citing it as a retaliatory move filed after their colleagues were removed from service following disciplinary proceedings. The FIR, registered two years after the disciplinary action, was deemed an abuse of legal process, as the Court found it to be a “counter blast” to the petitioners’ original complaint. This decision highlights the importance of preventing misuse of legal provisions for personal retaliation.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court canceled an FIR (First Information Report) against two Civil Judges in a case that has been pending for over a decade. The case involved allegations under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
The accusations stemmed from an incident during their training at the Judicial Academy, where the two judges were alleged to have had a conflict with their colleagues and were accused of using caste-based slurs.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J Sreenivas Rao noted that the FIR appeared to be a retaliatory move.
“It is pertinent to mention that respondent No.5 has lodged a complaint against the petitioners on 09.10.2015, subsequent to the report submitted by the Director, Andhra Pradesh Judicial Academy, Secunderabad, to the Registrar (Vigilance) basing upon the information/complaint of the petitioners and after conducting enquiry against respondent No.5 and Mr.S.Kalyan Chakravarthy. It clearly shows that respondent No.5 lodged a complaint against the petitioners maliciously as a counter blast and the same is clear abuse of process of law and the principle laid down in State of Haryana (supra) is squarely applicable to the present case,”
-the Court said.
The two petitioners were appointed as Junior Civil Judges in 2013 and were sent to Bengaluru for judicial training. During their stay at the Judicial Academy hostel, certain incidents took place, which led the judges to submit a formal report to the Director of the Judicial Academy. The report described the events in detail.
The Director forwarded this report to the High Court. Following this, disciplinary action was taken, and an internal inquiry was conducted. In 2015, the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad decided to impose the highest penalty, removing the respondent and others involved from service.
After the disciplinary proceedings and the removal order, the petitioners discovered that one of the respondents had lodged a complaint against them. This complaint led to the registration of an FIR under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
The Court pointed out that the FIR was registered two years after the disciplinary action was taken, making it clear that it was an act of retaliation.
The Court highlighted that the delay in filing the FIR and the sequence of events suggested malice.
“The FIR, which was registered after a delay of two years, appeared to be a retaliation against the complaint made by the petitioners”
-the Bench remarked.
Based on these findings, the Court decided to quash the FIR, terming it an “abuse of process of law.”
- Advocate N Naveen Kumar represented the petitioners.
- Government Counsel Pottigari Sridhar Reddy appeared for the respondents.
The Telangana High Court concluded that the case was a counter blast to the petitioners’ original complaint. It deemed the FIR an act of malice and quashed it entirely.
CASE TITLE:
Asifa Sultana & Anr v State & Ors.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on SC/ST Act
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
