Leena Vivek Masal vs The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 9 OF 2018 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.)No.4678 of 2013)

Leena Vivek Masal ….Appellant(s)

VERSUS

State of Maharashtra & Anr. ….Respondent(s)

WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.10 OF 2018 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.)No.4690 of 2013) Manisha Uday Sonar ….Appellant(s)

VERSUS

State of Maharashtra & Anr. ….Respondent(s)

AND CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.11 OF 2018 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.)No.5207 of 2013)

Leena Vivek Masal ….Appellant(s)

VERSUS Signature Not Verified

State of Maharashtra & Anr. ….Respondent(s) Digitally signed by ASHA SUNDRIYAL Date: 2018.01.05 16:30:15 IST Reason:

1 JUDGMENT

Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.

1) Leave granted.

2) These appeals are filed by two accused persons

against the final judgment and order dated

21.02.2013 passed by the High Court of Judicature

at Bombay in Crl.W.P. Nos. 2252/2011, 2251/2011

and 652/2012 which, in turn, arise out of the order

dated 30.09.2008 passed by the Judicial

Magistrate, Fast Court, Uran in Regular Case No. 6

of 2008.

3) It is not necessary to set out the factual details

of the case in the light of the order that we are

passing.

4) The present proceedings arise out of interim

order dated 30.09.2008 passed by the Judicial

Magistrate in Regular Case No.6 of 2008 whereby

the Magistrate issued process summons against the

appellants herein in relation to the complaint filed

2 by respondent No. 2 under the provisions of the

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention

of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as

“the Act”) seeking appellants’ prosecution for

commission of the offences under the Act. The

complaint is pending for its final disposal on merits.

5) Having heard the learned counsel for the

parties and on perusal of the record of the case, we

are inclined to dispose of these appeals with

following observations:

6) First, as mentioned above, these appeals arise

out of an interim order passed by the Magistrate by

which he has issued process summons of the

complaint filed by respondent No. 2 against the

appellants; Second, when admittedly the complaint

filed by respondent No. 2 against the appellants is

pending consideration for its disposal on its merits

and the appellants will get an opportunity to file

reply and raise all the pleas and adduce evidence in

3 accordance with law, therefore, we do not consider

it proper to interfere in the impugned order; Third,

the complaint filed by respondent No. 2 would be

decided by the Magistrate on the basis of evidence

adduced by the parties keeping in view the law

applicable to the issues arising in the case; and

lastly, the order issuing process against the

appellants being purely interim in nature having

been passed in exercise of its discretionary powers

finding prima facie case to entertain the complaint

filed by respondent No. 2, cannot be interfered with

in our appellate jurisdiction under Article 136 of the

Constitution. It is more so when the appellants

would get full opportunity to raise all factual and

legal pleas in accordance with law while contesting

the complaint on merits.

7) So far as the observations made by the

Magistrate in its earlier order dated 30.06.2006 in

Regular Criminal Case No. 114/2005 is concerned,

4 all that we need to say is that it will be for the

Magistrate to decide its effect on the present

proceedings at the time of final disposal of the

complaint in accordance with law.

8) We make it clear that the Magistrate, who is

seized of the complaint, would decide it on merits

uninfluenced by any observations made by the High

Court in the impugned order.

9) With these observations, the appeals stand

disposed of finally.

10) Let the complaint be decided by the Magistrate

expeditiously, as directed above.

………...................................J. [R.K. AGRAWAL]

…...……..................................J. [ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE] New Delhi;

January 5, 2018

5