|Case Name||Leena Vivek Masal v/s State of Maharashtra & Anr|
|Case Number||Criminal Appeal Number: 9 of 2018|
|Court||Supreme Court of India|
|Bench||Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre, Justice R.K. Agrawal|
|Author of the judgment||Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre|
|Decided On||January 05, 2018|
|Relevant Act/Sections||Constitutional Law of India, 1950.
Relevant Article: Article 136
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
|Author of the case brief||Titiksha Sinha|
Brief Facts and Procedural History-
According to the facts of the case, these appeals before the Supreme Court were filed by the two accused persons- Leena Vivek Masal and Manisha Uday Sonar. It is an appeal against the final judgment and order dated 21.02.2013 passed by the Bombay High Court. This order by the Bombay High Court, in turn, arose out of the order dated 30.09.2008 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Fast Court, Uran in Regular Case No. 6 of 2008.
The present proceedings before the Supreme Court arose out of the interim order dated 30.09.2008 whereby the Magistrate issued process summons against the appellants in relation to the complaint filed by the respondent under the provisions of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The said complaint by the respondent sought appellants prosecution for commission of the offences mentioned under the act of 1989. The complaint is pending for its final disposal on merits.
The issue to be decided-
Whether Article 136 of the Indian Constitution is applicable in the present case? (Article 136 of the Indian Constitution talks about ‘Special leave to appeal by the Supreme Court’)
The ratio as given by the Judge-
- Article 136 will not be applicable in the present case.
- The appeals arose out of an interim order passed by the Magistrate by which he issued process summons of the complaint filed by respondent against the appellants.
- The complaint filed by respondent against the appellants was pending consideration for its disposal on its merits and the appellants would get an opportunity to file a reply and raise all the pleas and adduce evidence.
- The complaint filed by respondent would be decided by the Magistrate on the basis of evidence adduced by the parties keeping in view the law applicable to the issues arising in the case.
- The order being purely interim in nature having been passed in exercise of its discretionary powers cannot be interfered with in the appellate jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution.
The decision of the court-
It was held by the court that the Magistrate, who was seized of the complaint, would decide the case on merits uninfluenced by any observations made by the High Court in the impugned order. The appeals thus were disposed off.