HC quashes SC, ST case against judicial officers filed by their colleague

The division bench of the Telangana High Court comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Sreenivas Rao made it clear that the High Court can quash the criminal proceedings when it found that such proceedings are maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and to spite him due to personal grudge.

The Bench also noted that while exercising its jurisdiction in dealing with the quash petitions, the High Court 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 or registration of the case as well as the materials collected in the course of investigation.

The Bench was dealing with a petition filed by Asifa Sultana and others seeking quash of a First Information Report (FIR) registered against them under the provisions of the SC, and ST Atrocities Act in 2015 at the Marredpally police station based on a complaint filed by their lady colleague judicial officer .

When the High Court went into the details of the case, it was informed that during the training of judicial officers in October 2015, the complainant — a lady judicial officer — was found with her male colleague — a trainee judicial officer — in her quarters at midnight. Asifa Sultana and others, who were their colleagues, brought this issue to the notice of the higher authorities at the Judicial Academy situated at Secunderabad.

Subsequently, the lady judicial officer filed a complaint against Asifa Sultana and two others accusing them of abusing her in the name of her caste. Based on the complaint, the Marredpally police registered the case against the three judicial officers.

Later, the authorities of Judicial Academy at Secunderabad conducted an inquiry and recommended the state government to remove the male trainee judicial officer, who was found in the complainant’s room during the training period. Based on the recommendation, the government has issued his dismissal orders.

The Division Bench, therefore, concluded that the complainant lady judicial officer had filed the FIR maliciously as a counter-blast and it is a clear abuse of process of law. Hence, the Bench quashed the FIR against the three judicial officers.