(Adarsh Kumar Goel and Uday Umesh Lalit, JJ.)
Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan ______________________ Petitioner
v.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ___________________ Respondent(s)
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5661/2017, decided on November 20, 2017
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Certain adverse remarks were recorded against respondent no. 2-Bhaskar Karbhari Gaidwad by the Principal and Head of the Department of the College of Pharmacy where respondent no. 2 was employed. Respondent No. 2 sought sanction for his prosecution under the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 and for certain other connected offences. The said matter was dealt with by the petitioner and sanction was declined. This led to another complaint by respondent no. 2 against the petitioner under the said provisions. The quashing of the said complaint has been declined by the High Court.
3. The question which has arisen in the course of consideration of this matter is whether any unilateral allegation of mala fide can be ground to prosecute officers who dealt with the matter in official capacity and if such allegation is falsely made what is protection available against such abuse.
4. Needless to say that if the allegation is to be acted upon, the proceedings can result in arrest or prosecution of the person and have serious consequences on his right to liberty even on a false complaint which may not be intended by law meant for protection of a bona fide victim.
5. The question is whether this will be just and fair procedure under Article 21 of the Constitution of India or there can be procedural safeguards so that provisions of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 are not abused for extraneous considerations..
6. Issue notice returnable on 10th January, 2018.
7. In the meanwhile, there shall be stay of further proceedings.
8. Issue notice to Attorney General of India also as the issue involves interpretation of a central statute.
9. Mr. Amrendra Sharan, learned senior counsel is requested to assist the Court as amicus. Mr. Sharan will be at liberty to have assistance of Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, Advocate.
10. Learned counsel for the petitioner will furnish two set of paper books to Mr. Amendra Sharan, learned senior counsel.
———
