Shyam C. Chandak JUDGMENT
Shyam C. Chandak, J.
1. By this Application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Applicants invoke inherent powers of this Court and seeks quashing and setting aside of C.R. No. II-3/13, registered with Igatpuri Police Station, Nashik on 25th January, 2013, for the Offences Punishable under Sections 3 (1) (viii) & (x) of the Scheduled Castes & The Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 read with Sections 352, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the Applicants.
2. Heard Mr. Niranjan Mundargi, learned Counsel for the Applicants and Ms. Anamika Malhotra, learned APP for Respondent No.1- State. Respondent No.2 is duly served. He has filed his affidavit-in-reply. However none appeared for Respondent No.2 when taken up for final hearing.
3. The ad-interim relief herein was granted on 1st February, 2013. Rule was issued on 5th February, 2013 and the ad-interim relief is continued until further orders.
4. The impugned F.I.R. has been registered on the complaint filed by Respondent No.2 wherein he narrated that, since 16th October, 2001 Respondent No. 2 has been working as a Peon in Family Convent High School, at Igatpuri ('the school', for short). Since then, he has been performing his duties such as cleaning classrooms, offices and carrying correspondence from one office to another. In June, 2003 Applicant No.2 was transferred to the school as Headmistress. In the year 2006-2007 Applicant No.1 was transferred to the school as Manager. Since then, the Applicants knew that Respondent No.2 belongs to "Navbuddha" social status. It is stated that, Respondent No.2 was regularly performing his duties assigned by the school. The Applicants, however, caused him to do extra work i.e. cleaning toilet-bathroom, shit of domestic dog at their bungalow, and garden by removing garbage there. In the year 2006 itself, Respondent No.2 objected to said additional work on the ground that, it is not part of his duty, so henceforth he would do his school duties only, as before. Therefore, the Applicants got annoyed, and they abused, insulted and threatened to Respondent No.2 stating that "You are a lower cast person, you will have to do all the work told by us, otherwise we would remove you from the school by making false accusations against you" and then driven him out of the school. Yet Respondent No.2 used to daily attend his duties in the school. But both the Applicants were not allowing him to perform his duty for he refused to do the additional work. However, Respondent No.2 used to daily attend the school and be there till the day's school is over. This continued for about three and half months. Thereafter also the Applicants insulted Respondent No.2 and caused his mental harassment for he refused to do the work told by them.
4.1. It is alleged that, then the Applicants prepared a false record and based on that gave a suspension notice to Respondent No.2 on 4th May, 2011 and after suspending him, a departmental inquiry was initiated against him. However, the Applicants abruptly stopped the inquiry and caused Respondent No.2 to resume his duty.
4.2. It is alleged that, Respondent No.2 had filed various complaints against the Applicants on account of his aforesaid harassment. During the inquiry of the said complaints, the Applicants assured that, henceforth they would not cause him such harassment, therefore, Respondent No.2 withdrew the said complai........