Patna High Court
Jai Prakash PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The court held that the complaint was frivolous and vexatious, an abuse of process, and therefore set aside the order of cognizance and quashed the prosecution.
Summary
The complainant, a ward member of Ward 9, alleged that the headmaster of a school (appellant 1) and his nephew (appellant 2) abused her caste name, assaulted her and attempted to outrage her modesty on 31 May 2023, claiming the incident was linked to her desire to become chairperson of the Vidyalaya Shiksha Samiti. The appellants contended that the complaint was false, motivated by a personal agenda to secure the chairmanship, and that the complainant was ineligible for the post because the school fell in Ward 10, where only the ward member of Ward 10 could be chairperson. The High Court examined the eligibility, the nature of the alleged caste‑based abuse, and the Supreme Court’s guidance on frivolous or vexatious complaints. It held that the allegations did not satisfy the ingredients of offences under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and that the complaint was filed to harass the appellants, constituting an abuse of process. Consequently, the order of cognizance dated 10 Oct 2023 was set aside and the prosecution was quashed.
Issues considered
- Whether the complaint under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and the IPC is maintainable given the alleged motive and eligibility of the complainant.
- Whether the alleged use of caste name and assault amount to offences under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the complaint is frivolous or vexatious and thus liable to be quashed under Section 482 CrPC/Article 226.
- Whether the complainant was eligible to be appointed chairperson of the Vidyalaya Shiksha Samiti.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 341, 354, 354(B), 504, 506/34
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)
Subjects
- SC/ST Act
- false complaint
- frivolous litigation
- abuse of process
- Section 482 CrPC
- caste harassment
- school committee appointment
- IPC offences
- quashal of criminal proceedings
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5522 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2023 Thana- SHEKHPURA COMPLAINT CASE
District- Sheikhpura
======================================================
1. Jai Prakash Prasad S/o Muneshwar mahto R/o - Village Baikathpur, P.S.-
Ariyari, District- Sheikhpura.
2. Jitendra Kumar S/o Chandrika Mahto R/o - Village Baikathpur, P.S.- Ariyari,
District- Sheikhpura.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. usha Devi W/o Manoge Chaudhary R/o - Village Baikathpur, P.S.- Ariyari,
District- Sheikhpura.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Bipin Kumar, Advocate
Ms. Sarita Kumari, Advocate
Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Ravikant Kumar, Advocate
For the Informant : Mr. Sheo Nandan Prasad, Advocate
Ms. Sweta Burnwal, Advocate
Mr. Rajnish Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Sp.PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
7 16-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
counsel for the Informant and learned Special Public Prosecutor
for the State.
2. The present application has been filed for quashing
of the order dated 10.10.2023 passed by learned Additional
District Judge-1st, Sheikhpura in SC/ST Case No. 25/2023.
Whereby and whereunder cognizance has been taken against the
appellants for offences under Sections 341, 323, 354, 354(B),
504, 506/34 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5522 of 2023(7) dt.16-03-2026
2/9
of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on
31.05.2023, the complainant was called to the office of
Appellant No. 1, who is the Headmaster of the school, where he
abused her by taking her caste name. Appellant No. 1 told the
complainant that he would not allow her to become the
Chairperson of Utkramit Middle School, Baikatpur. When the
complainant protested, Appellant No. 1 pushed her on the
ground holding her hair and Appellant No. 2, who is the nephew
of Appellant No. 1, also abused the complainant and assaulted
her with kicks and punches. Thereafter, both the appellants
pulled her saree with intention to outrage her modesty. The
complainant has also stated that both the appellants are powerful
persons in the village, due to which she was not able to register
her FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
false and frivolous complaint has been lodged by O.P. No.
2/complainant with ulterior motive, as she wanted to become the
Chairperson of Utkramit Middle School, Baikatpur. It is further
submitted that the complainant is the Ward Member of Ward
No. 9, whereas the said school falls within Ward No. 10, and
therefore she was not eligible to become the Chairperson of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5522 of 2023(7) dt.16-03-2026
3/9
Vidyalaya Shiksha Samiti.
5. Learned counsel further submits that by lodging the
false complaint, the complainant intended to put pressure upon
the appellants. Appellant No. 1 is the Headmaster of Utkramit
Middle School, Baikatpur, while Appellant No. 2 and the
complainant are candidates for the post of Chairperson of the
said School Education Committee. It is submitted that the
school admittedly falls within Ward No. 10, whereas the
complainant is the Ward Member of Ward No. 9.
6. Learned counsel further submits that as per the
letter issued by the Block Education Officer (B.E.O.), Ariyari,
dated 26.05.2023, annexed as Annexure–3, it appears that in
accordance with the relevant rules, the Ward Member of the
ward in which the school is situated shall be the ex officio
Chairperson of the Vidyalaya Shiksha Samiti.
7. It has also been submitted that Appellant No. 2 had
earlier filed a complaint before the Sub-Divisional Public
Grievance Redressal Authority, Sheikhpura, regarding the
appointment of the Chairperson of the Vidyalaya Shiksha Samiti
of Utkramit Middle School, Baikatpur. The Grievance Redressal
Officer, vide order dated 10.05.2023, directed that the
Chairperson of the Vidyalaya Shiksha Samiti should be
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5522 of 2023(7) dt.16-03-2026
4/9
appointed from the ward in which the school is situated, i.e.,
Ward No. 10.
8. Since the complainant admittedly belongs to Ward
No. 9, she was not eligible to be appointed as the Chairperson of
the Vidyalaya Shiksha Samiti of the school in question. Thus, in
abuse of the process of Court, complainant filed the present
vexatious complaint in order to put pressure upon both
Headmaster as well as the ward member of ward no. 10.
Learned counsel for the appellant relies upon the judgment of
the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Salib @ Shalu @
Salim v. State of U.P. & Others, reported in (2023) 20 SCC
194: 2023 (3) PLJR 389 (SC).
9. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent
No. 2 argued that there is specific allegation against the
appellants that they called the complainant by her caste name,
assaulted her, and also tried to outrage her modesty. The
complaint has been supported by the statements of three
witnesses who have corroborated the statement of the
complainant and the learned Special Court has rightly taken
cognizance under the provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989, along with the relevant sections of the
Indian Penal Code.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5522 of 2023(7) dt.16-03-2026
5/9
10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and
have gone through the materials on record including the
impugned order.
11. It is not disputed that appellant no. 1 is the
headmaster of Utkramit Middle School, Baikatpur and the
appointment of the chairman of Vidyalaya Siksha Samiti was to
be done. As per the government letter as well as the order
passed by the Grievance Redressal Authority, the ward member
of the particular ward shall be the ex officio chairman of the
Vidyalaya Siksha Samiti.
12. From the records, it also appears that the school in
question is falling under Ward No. 10. The complainant is the
Ward Member of Ward No. 9. As such, she could not have been
appointed or made chairperson of the Vidyalaya Siksha Samiti of
the concerned School.
13. From the complaint, it does not appear that the
alleged abuse using the caste name was made in full public view
or with the intention to denigrate the prestige of the
complainant. Merely stating the caste or using simple abusive
language, especially if not in full public view, does not
automatically constitute an offence under Section 3(1)(r) and (s)
of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5522 of 2023(7) dt.16-03-2026
6/9
14. In the judgment of Salib @ Shalu @ Salim
(supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court in paragraph 26 has
observed that whenever an accused comes before the Court
invoking either the inherent powers under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) or extraordinary
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to get the FIR
or the criminal proceedings quashed essentially on the ground
that such proceedings are manifestly frivolous or vexatious or
instituted with the ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance, then
in such circumstances the Court owes a duty to look into the
FIR with care and a little more closely. It is so because once the
complainant decides to proceed against the accused with an
ulterior motive for wreaking personal vengeance, etc. then he
would ensure that the FIR/complaint is very well drafted with
all the necessary pleadings. The complainant would ensure that
the averments made in the FIR/complaint are such that they
disclose the necessary ingredients to constitute the alleged
offence. Therefore, it will not be just enough for the Court to
look into the averments made in the FIR/complaint alone for the
purpose of ascertaining whether the necessary ingredients to
constitute the alleged offence are disclosed or not. In frivolous
or vexatious proceedings, the Court owes a duty to look into
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5522 of 2023(7) dt.16-03-2026
7/9
many other attending circumstances emerging from the record
of the case over and above the averments and, if need be, with
due care and circumspection try to read in between the lines.
The Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482
CrPC or Article 226 of the Constitution need not restrict itself
only to the stage of a case but is empowered to take into account
the overall circumstances leading to the initiation/registration of
the case as well as the materials collected in the course of
investigation.
15. Similarly, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mohd.
Wajid & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Ors., reported in (2023) 20
SCC 219, has also held that “…..it will not be just enough for
the Court to look into the averments made in the FIR/complaint
alone for the purpose of ascertaining whether the necessary
ingredients to constitute the alleged offence are disclosed or not.
In frivolous or vexatious proceedings, the Court owes a duty to
look into many other attending circumstances emerging from
the record of the case over and above the averments and, if need
be, with due care and circumspection try to read in between the
lines. The Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section
482 of the CrPC or Article 226 of the Constitution need not
restrict itself only to the stage of a case but is empowered to
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5522 of 2023(7) dt.16-03-2026
8/9
take into account the overall circumstances leading to the
initiation/registration of the case as well as the materials
collected in the course of investigation…..”
16. In the present matter the complaint has been filed
due to conflict of interest of the complainant as well as the claim
of Appellant No. 2 for the chairmanship of Vidyalaya Siksha
Samiti of the Utkramit Middle School, Baikatpur.
17. From the reports, it appears that the school in
question falls under Ward No. 10. Appellant No. 2 was the Ward
Member of Ward No. 10 and was therefore eligible to be
appointed as the Chairman of the Vidyalaya Shiksha Samiti. The
complainant, being the Ward Member of Ward No. 9, could not
have been appointed as the Chairman of the Vidyalaya Shiksha
Samiti of the school which is falling in Ward No. 10.
18. Considering the entire attending circumstances
and the nature of allegation, this court is of the view that a
frivolous vexatious complaint has been lodged in order to put
pressure upon the appellants for her appointment as the
chairman of the Vidyalaya Siksha Samiti. The complaint was
lodged in abuse of the process of Court to harass the appellants
and the learned Special Court has taken cognizance without
application of mind and without considering the attending
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5522 of 2023(7) dt.16-03-2026
9/9
circumstances. In the result, I find that the impugned order is
not sustainable.
19. Accordingly, the order of cognizance dated
10.10.2023 is set aside, and the entire prosecution against the
appellants is also quashed.
20. This appeal is, accordingly, allowed.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
Siwani/-
U T
Checking your session…