Three contentions are raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners in support of the petition. The first contention advanced by him is that, as the complaint does not mention either the caste of the accused persons, or that of the complainant, process could not have been issued. He sought to place reliance on some authoritative pronouncements wherein such a view was taken. However, the learned counsel for the complainant has drawn my attention to the Full Bench decision rendered by this Court in Pushpa Vijay Bonde Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 2009 (2) Bom.C.R.(Cri). 32. He has also drawn my attention to a decision delivered by the Supreme Court of India in Ashabai Machindra Adhagale Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 2009 (1) Bom.C.R.(Cri) 779 (S.C.). A reading of these two pronouncements leaves no manner doubt that, it would not be essential for a complainant to mention, either his own caste or that of the accused, in the complaint or in the First Information Report and that; on the ground that caste is not so mentioned, the proceedings cannot be quashed. {Para 3}
Print Page
