Bombay High Court quashes 16‑year-old SC/ST case against Mumbai lawyer

The Bombay High Court on Monday quashed a 2010 case under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (SC/ST Act) against an advocate and law college teacher, Virendranath B Tiwari [Virendranath B. Tiwari v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.]

Justice Ashwin D Bhobe said that the allegations were insufficient to attract offences under the SC/ST Act or the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

“At face value, the allegations in the FIR and chargesheet under challenge do not disclose any of the ingredients," the Court said while quashing the case. 

The FIR was lodged on a complaint by Chitra Shalunkhe, a teacher at Siddharth Law College in Mumbai, who alleged that in June 2007, Tiwari accused her of using bogus certificates and assaulted her with an umbrella. 

The Mumbai police registered a case under Section 324 IPC for assault and under provisions of the SC/ST Act. 

Tiwari appeared in person and argued that Salunkhe filed three successive complaints under the SC/ST Act as retaliation after he questioned her eligibility for a reserved post and her educational qualifications. 

He apprised the Court that he had already been acquitted or discharged in two of the SC/ST cases on similar allegations.

Salunkhe's counsel, Rizwan Merchant, conceded the FIR lacked caste-based humiliation, making Section 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act inapplicable.

However, he argued that the case under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act along with sections 323 (causing hurt) and 354 (outraging modesty) of the IPC should be sustained.

Justice Bhobe noted that mere knowledge of the complainant’s caste is not enough and that the material did not show any insult or intimidation on account of caste or use of caste name in public view. 

“Considering the nature of the allegations made in the impugned FIR, Virendranath Tiwari, a senior citizen aged 74, is justified in arguing that the proceedings initiated by Salunkhe for the third time are an act of vengeance aimed at causing harassment and humiliation to him,” the judge concluded. 

The Court also found that the alleged assault using umbrella did not meet the ingredients of an offence under the provisions of the IPC. 

The judge also held that Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act was introduced only in 2016 could not be applied to a 2007 incident.

Consequently, the Court quashed the FIR and chargesheet, bringing to an end a 16‑year-old case against Tiwari.

[Read Judgment]