Chinthada Anand vs. State Of Andhra Pradesh

2026 INSC 283
REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1580 OF 2026
(ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (CRIMINAL) NO. 9231/2025)
CHINTHADA ANAND …. APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AND OTHERS
…. RESPONDENT(S)

J U D G M E N T
PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, J.
1) Leave granted.
2) The present Appeal arises out of the impugned judgment dated
1
30.04.2025 passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati in
Criminal Petition No. 7114 of 2022 filed under Section 482 of the Code of
2
Criminal Procedure, 1973 , whereby, the High Court has quashed the
criminal proceedings against respondent nos. 2 to 7 in Spl. SC No. 36 of 2021
arising out of FIR No. 08 of 2021 registered for offences punishable under
Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
3
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 341, 506 and 323 read with
4
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 on the file of the Special Court
under the SC/ST Act, Guntur District.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
MINI
Date: 2026.03.24
15:41:16 IST
Reason:

1
‘High Court’
2
‘Cr.PC’
3
‘SC/ST Act’
4
‘IPC’
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 1 of 33




FACTUAL MATRIX
3) The appellant in the present proceedings is Chinthada Anand, resident
of Kothapalem Village, Pittalavanipalem Mandal, Guntur District. He claims
to belong to the Madiga community, a Scheduled Caste and states that for
nearly ten years prior to the incident, he had been conducting Sunday prayer
meetings as a Pastor at different houses in the village, including the house of
one Doma Koti Reddy.
4) According to the appellant, in December 2020, he began receiving
abusive and intimidating telephone calls from unknown numbers, in which
he was allegedly abused by caste-based slurs and was threatened with dire
consequences. These calls, according to him, were on account of his religious
activities and his presence in the village as a Pastor.
5) The first incident is stated to have occurred on 03.01.2021. The
appellant alleges that while he was conducting Sunday prayers at around
noon at the house of Doma Koti Reddy, one of the accused called him outside,
assaulted him by slapping and striking him, abused him by referring to his
caste, and warned him against continuing the prayer meetings. The appellant
states that he did not retaliate.
6) The second and principal incident is stated to have occurred on
24.01.2021. It is alleged that after completing Sunday prayers and while
returning home, the appellant was wrongfully restrained at the entrance of
the nearby hamlet by respondent nos. 2 to 7 and twenty-five others. He alleged
that his mobile phone and vehicle keys were forcibly snatched, he was
dragged, beaten and abused by caste name in public view, and threatened
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 2 of 33




with death. It is also alleged that threats were extended to kill his family
members and kidnap his children.
7) On the next day, i.e., 25.01.2021, the appellant submitted a written
complaint before Chandole Police Station. On the basis of the said complaint,
FIR No. 08 of 2021 came to be registered on 26.01.2021 for the offences
punishable under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act and
Sections 341, 506, 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC.
8) Investigation was undertaken by the Sub-Divisional Police Officer,
Bapatla. During the course of investigation, statements of the appellant, his
wife and several villagers were recorded. The appellant was medically
examined and the injury sustained by him was certified to be simple in
nature. The Tahsildar conducted verification regarding the caste status of the
appellant and issued a certificate showing him as belonging to Hindu-Madiga
community (Scheduled Caste), while the accused persons admittedly
belonged to the Reddy community (OC category).
9) Upon completion of investigation, the Police filed the charge-sheet on
30.04.2021, which was taken on file as Spl. SC No. 36 of 2021 before the
Special Court under the SC/ST Act for Guntur District. All the
aforementioned offences were included in the charge-sheet.
10) The accused persons thereafter approached the High Court by filing a
petition under Section 482 of the Cr.PC seeking quashing of the proceedings.
The primary ground urged before the High Court was that the appellant had
admittedly converted to Christianity and was working as a Pastor for about
ten years, and therefore, in view of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order,
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 3 of 33




1950, he could not legally claim the status of a Scheduled Caste so as to
invoke the provisions of the SC/ST Act.
11) Vide impugned judgment dated 30.04.2025, the High Court had
quashed the entire criminal proceedings in Spl. SC No. 36 of 2021 qua
respondent nos. 2 to 7, holding inter alia that the appellant cannot claim
protection under the SC/ST Act since he had been openly professing
Christianity and working as a Pastor for about a decade. The High Court was
of the view that caste system is not recognised in Christianity and that a
person who has converted and continues to actively work as a Pastor and
profess Christianity, cannot, in law, claim protection under the SC/ST Act.

12) Further, the High Court noted that the statements of witnesses did not
consistently support the appellant’s version of a large group assault, and only
a limited corroboration was available for the alleged restraint and attack, the
medical evidence showed only a simple injury sustained by the appellant. On
an overall assessment, the High Court held that continuation of the criminal
proceedings against respondent nos. 2 to 7 would amount to an abuse of the
process of law.
13) Aggrieved, the appellant has preferred the present Appeal challenging
the quashing of proceedings against respondent Nos. 2 to 7 in Spl. SC No. 36
of 2021 arising out of FIR No. 08 of 2021.

SUBMISSION OF PARTIES

14) We have heard the learned counsels for both the parties and perused
the materials on record.
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 4 of 33




15) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the High Court
wrongly quashed the criminal proceedings against respondent nos. 2 to 7
despite there being a prima facie case made out against them. Learned
counsel highlighted that the High Court failed to appreciate that the appellant
was subjected to physical assault as well as caste-based insults, was also
intimidated by the accused persons.
16) Furthermore, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the High
Court gravely erred in holding that the appellant was disentitled from invoking
the provisions of the SC/ST Act, merely on account of his conversion to
Christianity. It was argued that caste is a matter of birth and not of faith, and
a change of religion does not wipe out the social identity and historical
disadvantages attached to one’s caste.
17) To bolster his submission, learned counsel for the appellant placed
reliance on G.O. Ms. No. 341 dated 30.08.1977, issued by the Government of
Andhra Pradesh, which specifically stipulates that mere change of religion
shall not operate as a bar to Scheduled Caste persons from securing the
benefits to which they were otherwise entitled prior to conversion.
18) Per contra, learned senior counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 7 supported
the impugned judgment and submitted that the High Court has rightly
exercised its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.PC to quash the
proceedings, as the very foundation for invoking the provisions of the SC/ST
Act was absent.

19) Learned senior counsel submitted that the appellant is admittedly a
Pastor, performing Sunday prayers for more than a decade, and by his own
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 5 of 33




showing professes and practises Christianity. In such a situation, he cannot
claim the protection of the SC/ST Act, which is applicable only to persons
who are members of the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes within the
ambit of clauses (24) and (25) of Article 366 read with Articles 341 and 342 of
the Constitution of India, 1950.
20) Learned senior counsel pointed out that Clause 3 of the Constitution
(Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 unequivocally provides that no person who
professes a religion different from Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism shall be
deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste. It was further argued that the
expression “professes” has consistently been interpreted by this Court to
mean open declaration or practice of a religion, and that the relevant test is
the material time when the benefit is claimed.
21) Learned senior counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 7 further argued that
the sine qua non for offences under the SC/ST Act is that the victim must be
a bona fide SC/ST member. It was highlighted that where the appellant does
not belong to an SC/ST community, the very jurisdictional requirement for
applying the SC/ST Act fails. Hence, according to the learned senior counsel,
the High Court rightly quashed the proceedings.
22) It has been contended by learned senior counsel for respondent nos. 2
to 7 that the appellant’s reliance on a purported caste certificate is of no
assistance. It is pointed out that there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest
that the appellant reconverted to Hinduism or that the community accepted
him back. Therefore, mere production of a certificate cannot override the
admitted fact that the appellant is a practising Christian.
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 6 of 33




23) Learned senior counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 7 submitted that
reliance of the appellant on G.O.Ms. No. 341 issued by the State is wholly
misplaced since an executive order cannot override the Presidential Order
issued under Article 341 of the Constitution of India, and the State has no
authority to enlarge, modify, or alter the Scheduled Caste list.
24) Lastly, the learned senior counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 7 submitted
that the present case concerns criminal prosecution, and no person can be
subjected to penal consequences under the SC/ST Act unless the appellant
indisputably falls within the definition of “Scheduled Caste or Scheduled
Tribe” under the Constitution of India. The High Court, therefore, according
to learned senior counsel, has correctly held that, in the absence of such
foundational facts, continuance of the proceedings would be an abuse of
process.
ANALYSIS
25) Before considering the correctness of the High Court’s decision to quash
the criminal proceedings against respondent nos. 2 to 7, it becomes necessary
to first delineate the broader legal issue that arises, namely, the conditions
under which a person, who has undergone religious conversion, may avail the
statutory benefits granted to the members of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes. The clarification of this overarching principle is essential,
as the resolution of the present controversy must rest upon its proper
application.
26) To address the aforesaid issue, it is appropriate to state the authorities
which talk about the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Under the
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 7 of 33




Constitution of India, 1950, Articles 341 and 342 enumerate about the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The relevant Articles are reproduced
hereinbelow:
“341. Scheduled Castes.—(1) The President may with
respect to any State or Union territory, and where it is a
State, after consultation with the Governor thereof, by
public notification, specify the castes, races or tribes or
parts of or groups within castes, races or tribes which shall
for the purposes of this Constitution be deemed to be
Scheduled Castes in relation to that State8[or Union
territory, as the case may be.

(2) Parliament may by law include in or exclude from the
list of Scheduled Castes specified in a notification issued
under clause (1) any caste, race or tribe or part of or group
within any caste, race or tribe, but save as aforesaid a
notification issued under the said clause shall not be
varied by any subsequent notification.

342. Scheduled Tribes.—(1) The President may with
respect to any State or Union territory, and where it is a
State, after consultation with the Governor thereof, by
public notification, specify the tribes or tribal communities
or parts of or groups within tribes or tribal communities
which shall for the purposes of this Constitution be
deemed to be Scheduled Tribes in relation to that State or
Union territory, as the case may be.

(2) Parliament may by law include in or exclude from the
list of Scheduled Tribes specified in a notification issued
under clause (1) any tribe or tribal community or part of
or group within any tribe or tribal community, but save as
aforesaid a notification issued under the said clause shall
not be varied by any subsequent notification.”

27) The core object of the above provisions is to provide right for the purpose
of affording protection to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes having
regard to the backwardness they suffer. The question which is now required
to be posed at the outset is what is a ‘tribe’?
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 8 of 33




5

28) In State of Kerala vs. Chandramohan , a three-Judge Bench of this
Court had the opportunity to discuss the concept of ‘tribe’ and its
characteristics. The relevant observations are reproduced hereinbelow:
“4. The object of the said provision is to provide right for
the purpose of grant of protection to the Scheduled Tribes
having regard to the economic and educational
backwardness wherefrom they suffer. For the
aforementioned purpose only the President of India has
been authorised to issue the notification to parts or groups
within the tribes. It is not in dispute that the Constitution
(Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 made in terms of the
aforementioned provisions is exhaustive. The question
which is required to be posed at the outset is what is a
tribe?

“Tribe has been defined as a social group of a
simple kind, the members of which speak
common dialect, have a single government and
act together for such common purposes as
warfare. Other typical characteristics include a
common name, a contiguous territory, a
relatively uniform culture or way of life and a
tradition of common descent. Tribes are usually
composed of a number of local communities e.g.
bands, villages or neighbourhoods and are often
aggregated in clusters of a higher order called
nations. The term is seldom applied to societies
that have achieved a strictly territorial
organisation in large States but is usually
confined to groups whose unity is based primarily
upon a sense of extended kinship ties though it
is no longer used for kin groups in the strict
sense, such as clans.”

(See Dr Gupta, Jai Prakash: The Customary Laws of
the Munda & the Oraon.)

“Tribe in the Dictionary of Anthropology is
defined as ‘a social group, usually with a definite
area, dialect, cultural homogeneity, and unifying
social organization. It may include several
subgroups, such as sibs or villages. A tribe
ordinarily has a leader and may have a common
ancestor, as well as patron deity. The families or
small communities making up the tribe are
linked through economic, social, religious,
family, or blood ties’.”

(See Bhowmik, K.L.: Tribal India: A Profile in Indian
Ethnology.)”

(emphasis supplied)

5
(2004) 3 SCC 429
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 9 of 33





29) Under clause (1) of Article 342, the President of India promulgated the
Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, identifying the tribes and tribal
communities recognised as “Scheduled Tribes” for different States and Union
Territories. The said order is reproduced hereinbelow:
“Constitution (Scheduled Tribe) Order, 1950

1. This Order may be called the Constitution (Scheduled
Tribes) Order, 1950.

2. The Tribes or tribal communities, or parts of, or
groups within, tribes or tribal communities, specified in
Parts I to XXII of the Schedule to this Order shall, in
relation to the States to which those Parts respectively
relate, be deemed to be Scheduled Tribes so far as regards
members thereof residents in the localities specified in
relation to them respectively in those Parts of that
Schedule.

3. Any reference in this Order to State or to a district or
other territorial division thereof shall be construed as a
reference to the State, district or other territorial division
as constituted on the 1st day of May, 1976.”

30) A person can claim benefits under the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes)
Order, 1950 only if he/she continues to belong to that particular tribe in
substance. If, due to conversion or long-term abandonment of tribal customs,
his/her tribal identity is in doubt, that question becomes a factual matter to
be determined at trial. In this regard, this Court in Chandramohan
(supra)
had observed:
“16. Before a person can be brought within the
purview of the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes)
Order, 1950, he must belong to a tribe. A person for
the purpose of obtaining the benefits of the
Presidential Order must fulfil the condition of being
a member of a tribe and continue to be a member of
the tribe. If by reason of conversion to a different
religion a long time back, he/his ancestors have not
been following the customs, rituals and other traits,
which are required to be followed by the members of
the tribe and even had not been following the
customary laws of succession, inheritance, marriage
etc. he may not be accepted to be a member of a
tribe. In this case, it has been contended that the family
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 10 of 33




of the victim had been converted about 200 years back
and in fact the father of the victim married a woman
belonging to a Roman Catholic, wherefrom he again
became a Roman Catholic. The question, therefore,
which may have to be gone into is as to whether the
family continued to be a member of a Scheduled Tribe
or not. Such a question can be gone into only during
trial.”

(emphasis supplied)

31) From the above, it becomes clear, that once a person belonging to a
Scheduled Tribe converts to another religion, ultimately through the passage
of time, the customs, rituals and other traits of that particular tribe may fall
into eclipse. If so, in such circumstance, it is proved that the person in
question has completely renounced himself from the customs, rituals and
other traits of his tribe, and has assimilated into the converted religion
following the practices and customs of that particular religion, a reasonable
inference can be drawn that such a person shall not be considered a part of
the tribe.
32) Let us now pivot to the legal foundations of Scheduled Castes. The
initial question which is required to be posed is what is a ‘caste’?
6
33) In C.M. Arumugam vs. S Rajagopal , a three-Judge Bench of this
Court had the opportunity to discuss on the question: what is ‘caste’? The
relevant observation is reproduced hereinbelow:
“10. But that immediately raises the question: what is a
caste? When we speak of a caste, we do not mean to
refer in this context to the four primary castes, but to
the multiplicity of castes and sub-castes which
disfigure the Indian social scene. “A caste”, as pointed
out by the High Court of Madras in Coopoosami Chetty
v. Duraisami Chetty [ILR 33 Mad 67] “is a voluntary
association of persons for certain purposes”. It is a well
defined yet fluctuating group of persons governed by
their own rules and regulations for certain internal
purposes. Sir H. Risley has shown in his book on People

6
(1976) 1 SCC 863
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 11 of 33




of India how castes are formed based not only on
community of religion, but also on community of
functions. It is also pointed out by Sankaran Nair, J. in
Muthusami v. Masilamani [ILR 33 Mad 342 : 20 Mad LJ
49] :

“... a change in the occupation sometimes creates
a new caste. A common occupation sometimes
combines members of different castes into a
distinct body which becomes a new caste.
Migration to another place makes sometimes a
new caste.”

A caste is more a social combination than a religious
group. But since, as pointed out by Rajamannar, C.J.,
in G. Michael v. S. Venkateswaran [AIR 1952 Mad 474]
ethics provides the standard for social life and it is
founded ultimately on religious beliefs and doctrines,
religion is inevitably mixed up with social conduct and
that is why caste has become an integral feature of
Hindu society. But from that it does not necessarily
follow as an invariable rule that whenever a person
renounces Hinduism and embraces another religious
faith, he automatically ceases to be a member of the
caste in which he was born and to which he belonged
prior to his conversion. It is no doubt true, and there
we agree with the Madras High Court in G. Michael case
that the general rule is that conversion operates as an
expulsion from the caste, or, in other words, the
convert ceases to have any caste, because caste is
predominantly a feature of Hindu society and
ordinarily a person who ceases to be a Hindu would not
be regarded by the other members of the caste as
belonging to their fold. But ultimately it must depend
on the structure of the caste and its rules and
regulations whether a person would cease to belong to
the caste on his abjuring Hinduism.”

(emphasis supplied)

34) In exercise of powers conferred under clause (1) of Article 341 of the
Constitution, the President issued the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) order,
1950. This Order specifies the castes deemed to be Scheduled Castes in
relation to various States and Union territories. The said Order is reproduced
hereinbelow:
“Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order, 1950

1. This Order may be called the Constitution (Scheduled
Castes) Order, 1950.

CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 12 of 33




2. Subject to the provisions of this Order, the castes, races
or tribes or parts of, or groups within, castes or tribes
specified in Parts to [XXV] of the Schedule to this Order
shall, in relation to the States to which those Parts
respectively relate, be deemed to be Scheduled Castes so
far as regards member thereof resident in the localities
specified in relation to them in those Parts of that
Schedule.

[3. Notwithstanding anything contained in paragraph
2, no person who professes a religion different from the
Hindu, the Sikh or the Buddhist] religion shall be
deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste.

[4. Any reference in this Order to a State or to a district or
other territorial division thereof shall be construed as a
reference to the State, district or other territorial division
as constituted on the 1st day of May, 1976.”
(emphasis supplied)

35) The question as to whether a person is a member of Scheduled Caste
or Scheduled Tribe remains an absolute question of fact. In the instant case,
the legislative history of Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes)
Order, 1950 is of immense significance. As originally enacted in the year 1950,

Clause 3 restricted Scheduled Caste status to persons professing the Hindu
religion. It was subsequently amended in the year 1956 to include persons
professing the Sikh religion. Later, in the year 1990, the provision was further
extended to include persons professing the Buddhist religion. It is important
to note that Christianity has not been included under this Order by any of
these amendments.
36) A careful perusal of Clause 3 of Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order,
1950 reveals that the term “professes” is of crucial significance. The clause
excludes any person who professes a religion different from Hindu, Sikh or
Buddhist from being deemed a member of a Scheduled Caste. It is, therefore,
necessary to examine what constitutes to professing a religion.
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 13 of 33




37) The interpretation of the term “profess” as used in Clause 3 of the
Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 came up for consideration
7
before this Court in Punjabrao vs. D.P. Meshram , wherein it was observed
thus:

(emphasis supplied)


7
1964 SCC OnLine SC 76
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 14 of 33




38) It is clear from the aforesaid interpretation that the term “profess”
connotes to publicly declare or practice a religion. The essence of the word
lies in the open avowal of one’s religious beliefs in a manner discernible to the
public at large. It is not merely a question of personal belief or private
conviction, but requires an outward manifestation of one’s faith.
39) It may be observed that Christianity, by its very theological foundation,
does not recognize or incorporate the institution of caste. The foundational
Christian scripture, The New Testament states: There is neither Jew nor
Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one
8
in Christ Jesus. Christianity in India exists in several denominational forms:
Roman Catholics (who adhere to liturgical traditions of the Latin Church),
various Protestant denominations (including the Church of South India,
Baptist, Lutheran, and Pentecostal churches), and the ancient Syrian
Christian communities.
40) The aforesaid denominational distinctions arise from differences in
theological interpretation, liturgical practice (the form of worship) and
ecclesiastical governance (the organizational framework within the church).
They do not represent any caste-based hierarchal stratifications.
41) In the present case, the facts are unequivocal. The appellant has been
serving as a Pastor for the past ten years. The appellant is also the treasurer
of the Pastors fellowship in Pittalavanipalem. The evidence further reveals that
the appellant conducted prayer meetings on Sundays at the residence of one
Doma Koti Reddy in Kohapalem Village, and regularly performed pastoral

8
Galatians 3:28 ( NIV) Galatians 3:28 NIV - There is neither Jew nor Gentile, - Bible Gateway
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 15 of 33




duties including preaching and conducting religious services for the Christian
congregation.
42) A pastor occupies a position of religious leadership within the Christian
faith, entrusted with the responsibility of preaching the gospel and conducting
religious services in accordance with the Christian doctrine. The appellant’s
occupation and conduct over this extended period constitute an open and
public declaration of his Christian faith. Viewing through the lens of
Punjabrao (supra), the appellant indubitably professes Christianity within
the meaning of Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order, 1950.
43) It is an admitted fact that the appellant previously belonged to the
Madiga community, which is specified
at Serial No. 32 in Part I (Andhra
Pradesh) of the Schedule to the Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order, 1950,
and is recognized as a Scheduled Caste. Had the appellant continued to
profess Hinduism, his status as a member of the Scheduled Caste would have
been beyond question. However, the appellant now professes Christianity.
44) Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 is
categorical and unambiguous in its terms. It provides that notwithstanding
anything contained in Clause 2, no person who professes a religion different
from Hindu, Sikh, or Buddhist shall be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled
Caste. The appellant professes Christianity, which is not among the three
religions specified in Clause 3. Irrespective of the appellant’s caste of origin,
he cannot be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste. However, the
learned counsel for the appellant has sought to challenge this position by
placing reliance on certain State Government Orders.
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 16 of 33




45) The learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance upon G.O. Ms
No.341, Social Welfare Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, dated
30.08.1977, which extends certain concessions granted to Scheduled Castes
(Hindus) by the State Government to Scheduled Caste converts to Christianity
and Buddhism. It is contended that in view of this Government Order, the
appellant ought to be recognized as a member of the Scheduled Caste for the
purposes of invoking the provisions of the SC/ST Act. For proper appreciation
of this contention, it is necessary to reproduce the relevant portions of
G.O.Ms. No.341 dated 30.08.1977:

“Government of Andhra Pradesh Abstract

Social Welfare (PR) Department

Dated: 30.08.1977

Social Welfare-Scheduled Caste Converts to Christianity
and Buddhism-Non-Statutory Concession available for
Scheduled Castes-Extension to Converts for Scheduled
Castes to Christianity and to Buddhism-Orders Issued.

G.O.Ms.No.341

Order:

Representations have been received by Government from
time to time requesting for the extension of the
concessions granted to Scheduled Castes (Hindus) to
Scheduled Castes Converted to Christianity and
Buddhism on the ground that the scheduled castes
converts also suffer from all the social disabilities as
Scheduled Castes, irrespective of their conversion. At the
state Harijan Conference held in April 1976 also, it was
recommended that mere change of religion should not
become a bar to Scheduled Castes persons from securing
the benefits that they would have been eligible as
Scheduled Castes, before conversion and, therefore, the
Scheduled Castes converts should be given all the benefits
they would have enjoyed before conversion to any other
religion.

2. Government have carefully examined the matter in the
light of the recommendations made by the State Harijan
Conference and other relevant considerations.
Government have decided to extended all the non-
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 17 of 33




statutory concessions now available to Scheduled
Castes (Hindus) to Scheduled Caste converts to
Christianity and to Buddhism. Accordingly in
suprecession of the orders issued in this behalf,
Government direct that all non -statutory concessions
granted to Scheduled Castes (Hindus) by the State
Government including economic support schemes
sanctioned by Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Castes
Cooperative Finance Corporation be extended to
Scheduled Castes converts to Christianity and to
Buddhism.

3. However, the statutory concessions i.e.,
reservations in educational institutions and
reservation in public services for scheduled castes are
applicable only to scheduled castes with reference to
the constitution (Scheduled Castes) order 1950. The
Scheduled Castes converts to Christianity and
Buddhism will not therefore be eligible for these
facilities. The existing orders in this respect will
continue.

(BY ORDER AND IN THE NAME OF THE GOVERNOR OF
ANDHRA PRADESH)

S.R.Sankaran. Secretary to Government.”

(emphasis supplied)


46) A careful perusal of the aforesaid State Government Order reveals that
it is of no avail to the appellant. The Government Order itself draws a clear
and categorical distinction between statutory and non-statutory benefits.
Clause 2 of the Government Order states that only “non-statutory
concessions’’ are being extended to Scheduled Caste converts to Christianity
and Buddhism. These non-statutory concessions include economic support
and similar welfare schemes which do not flow from statutory mandate.
47) More significantly, Clause 3 of the State Government Order is
unambiguous and unequivocal. It states that statutory concessions, including
reservations in educational institutions and public services, are applicable
only to Scheduled Castes with reference to the Constitution (Scheduled
Castes) Order, 1950. The clause categorically states that Scheduled Caste
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 18 of 33




converts to Christianity and Buddhism “will not therefore be eligible for these
facilities”. The Government Order thus explicitly recognizes and reaffirms the
position embodied in Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order,
1950, which restricts Scheduled Caste status to persons professing Hindu,
Sikh, or Buddhist religion.
48) The SC/ST Act is a statutory enactment of the Parliament of India. The
Act serves as a crucial legal framework to protect the rights and dignity of
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in India, ensuring stringent
measures against offences of atrocities and promoting their welfare and
security. The inapplicability of G.O.Ms No. 341 issued by the State to such
central enactments has been authoritatively clarified by the Central
Government itself.
rd
49) In a written reply to the Lok Sabha on 3 August, 2021, the Minister of
State for Social Justice and Empowerment, Shri A. Narayanaswamy,
addressed this precise issue. The Press Information Bureau issued a press
9
release titled “Benefit of Centrally Sponsored Schemes to Converted
Christians” recording this parliamentary reply, which reads as follows:
“Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment
Benefit of Centrally Sponsored Schemes to Converted
Christians
प्रविवि विवि : 03 AUG 2021 5:25PM by PIB Delhi

No person who professes a religion different from the
Hindu, the Sikh or the Buddhist religion shall be deemed
to be a member of a Scheduled Caste. The benefits of
Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS) meant for the welfare
and development of Scheduled Castes can not be extended
to Converted Christians from Scheduled Castes.


9
Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, “Benefit of Centrally Sponsored Schemes to
rd
Converted Christians (PIB Press Release, 03 August, 2021)
https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1741930&reg=3&lang=2
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 19 of 33




Government of Andhra Pradesh vide their letter dated
30.07.2021 has informed that they have issued orders
vide GO.Ms. No. 341, Social Welfare Dept., dated
13.08.1977 that non-statutory concessions granted to
the Scheduled Castes (Hindus) by the State Government
be extended to Scheduled Caste converts to Christian and
to Buddhism.

Since this will not apply to the benefits under
Centrally Sponsored Schemes or any other statutory
benefits, no further action is contemplated from the
Ministry . This information was given by The Minister of
State for Social Justice and Empowerment Shri A.
Narayanaswamy in the Loksabha in a written reply today.



MG/IA


रिलीज़ आईडी आगंिुक पटल
( : 1741930) : 2758”
(emphasis supplied)

50) The aforesaid Press Release by the Ministry of Social Justice and
Empowerment clarifies that G.O.Ms. No. 341 does not apply to the benefits
under centrally sponsored schemes or any other statutory benefits. Hence,
the reliance placed by the appellant on the Government Order is wholly
misconceived.

51) To further appreciate our discussion on the issue raised, it is necessary
to refer to some of the decisions of this Court which had addressed the same
questions. In C.M. Arumugam (supra) , a three-Judge Bench of this Court had
observed as follows:
“17. ….It is the orthodox Hindu society still dominated to
a large extent, particularly in rural areas, by medievalistic
outlook and status-oriented approach which attaches
social and economic disabilities to a person belonging to a
scheduled caste and that is why certain favoured
treatment is given to him by the Constitution. Once such
a person ceases to be a Hindu and becomes a Christian,
the social and economic disabilities arising because of
Hindu religion cease and hence it is no longer
necessary to give him protection and for this reason
he is deemed not to belong to a scheduled caste….”

(emphasis supplied)
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 20 of 33




10
52) Thereafter, in Guntur Medical College vs. Y Mohan Rao , a
Constitution Bench of this Court had discussed in detail the Constitution
(Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950. The observations made by the Court are as
follows:
“The President in exercise of the power conferred upon him
under Article 341 has issued the Constitution (Scheduled
Castes) Order, 1950. Paras (2) and (3) of this Order are
material and they read as follows:

“2. Subject to the provisions of this Order, the castes,
races or tribes or parts of or groups within caste or
tribes specified in Part I to XIII of the Schedule to this
Order shall, in relation to the States to which these
parts respectively relate, be deemed to be scheduled
castes so far as regards members thereof resident in
the localities specified in relation to them in those
Parts of that Schedule.

3. Notwithstanding anything contained in para 2, no
person who professes a religion different from the
Hindu or the Sikh religion shall be deemed to be a
member of a Scheduled Caste.”

The schedule to this order in Part I sets out the castes,
races or tribes or parts of or groups within castes or
tribes which shall in the different areas of the State of
Andhra Pradesh be deemed to be scheduled castes. One
of the castes specified there is Madiga caste and that
caste must, therefore, be deemed to be a scheduled
caste. But by reason of clause (3), a person belonging
to Madiga caste would not be deemed to be a member
of a scheduled caste unless he professes Hindu or Sikh
religion at the relevant time. It is not necessary that
he should have been born a Hindu or a Sikh. The only
thing required is that he should at a material time be
professing Hindu or Sikh religion.”

(emphasis supplied)

53) Following the dictum in Y Mohan Rao (supra) , a Division Bench of this
11
Court in M. Chandra vs. M. Thangamuthu and Another , observed as
follows:
“28. Under these provisions, the Constitution
(Scheduled Castes) Order was issued in 1950. It sets
out the castes, races and tribes in each State of India

10
(1976) 3 SCC 411
11
(2010) 9 SCC 712
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 21 of 33




and provides under Para 2, that a person belonging to
any of the castes specified therein be deemed to be a
Scheduled Caste for the purpose of the Constitution.
Para 3 contains a proviso to the effect that
notwithstanding anything contained in Para 2, no
person who professes a religion different from the
Hindu, Sikh or Buddhist religion shall be deemed to be
a member of a Scheduled Caste. Reading Paras 2 and 3
of the Presidential Order would show that if a person
belongs to a caste which is notified in the Schedule to
the Presidential Order he/she would have the status of
a Scheduled Caste, provided he/she professes
Hinduism or one of the other religions specified in Para
3 of the Order.

(emphasis supplied)

54) Before we further deal with this aspect, it would be apposite to refer to
a recent decision of this Court in C. Selvarani vs. The Special Secretary-
12
cum-District Collector and Others , wherein a Division Bench was
adjudicating the claim of a person seeking reservation benefits, available to
Scheduled Castes, after conversion to Christianity. The relevant portion of the
said decision is as follows:
“38. At this juncture, we may observe that India is a
secular country. Every citizen has a right to practise and
profess a religion of their choice as guaranteed under
Article 25 of the Constitution. One converts to a different
religion, when he/she is genuinely inspired by its
principles, tenets and spiritual thoughts. However, if the
purpose of conversion is largely to derive the benefits of
reservation but not with any actual belief on the other
religion, the same cannot be permitted, as the extension of
benefits of reservation to people with such ulterior motive
will only defeat the social ethos of the policy of reservation.

39. In the instant case, the evidence presented clearly
demonstrates that the appellant professes Christianity
and actively practices the faith by attending church
regularly. Despite the same, she claims to be a Hindu
and seeks for Scheduled Caste community certificate
for the purpose of employment. Such a dual claim
made by her is untenable and she cannot continue to
identify herself as a Hindu after baptism. Therefore,
the conferment of Scheduled Caste communal status
to the appellant, who is a Christian by religion, but
claims to be still embracing Hinduism only for the
purpose of availing reservation in employment, would

12
2024 INSC 900
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 22 of 33




go against the very object of reservation and would
amount to fraud on the Constitution.”

(emphasis supplied)

POSTULATES
55) Upon a cumulative reading of the aforesaid discussion and in the light
of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 and Constitution
(Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, the following principles emerge for
determining the entitlement of a person to be recognised as a member of a
Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe:
a) The claimant must demonstrably belong to a caste or tribe which is
specifically notified and recognised under Clause 2 of the Constitution
(Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 and Constitution (Scheduled Tribes)
Order, 1950, and such status must be established by clear, cogent, and
unimpeachable evidence.
b) No person who professes a religion other than Hindu, Sikh or Buddhist
shall be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste. This bar under
Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 is
categorical and absolute. Conversion to any religion not specified in
Clause 3 results in immediate and complete loss of Scheduled Caste
status from the moment of conversion regardless of birth.
c) No statutory benefit, protection, reservation, or entitlement under the
Constitution or under any enactment of Parliament or State Legislature
that is predicated upon the membership of a Scheduled Caste can be
claimed by or extended to any person who, by operation of Clause 3 of
the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, is not deemed to be a
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 23 of 33




member of a Scheduled Caste. This bar is absolute and admits no
exception.
d) A person cannot simultaneously profess and practice a religion other
than the ones specified in Clause 3 of Constitution (Scheduled Castes)
Order, 1950 and claim membership of a Scheduled Caste at the same
time. A person who professes and practices such religion for personal,
social and spiritual purposes cannot in law, assert membership of a
Scheduled Caste for the purpose of securing statutory benefits. The two
positions are mutually exclusive and contrary to the Constitutional
scheme.
e) In cases where a person claims to have reconverted from a religion not
specified in Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order,
1950 back to Hindu, Sikh or Buddhist religion, the following three
conditions must be cumulatively and conclusively established:
i. There must be a clear proof that the person originally belonged
to a caste notified under the Constitution (Scheduled Castes)
Order, 1950.
ii. There must be credible and unimpeachable evidence of bona fide
reconversion to the original religion, accompanied by complete
and unequivocal renunciation of the religion to which conversion
had taken place, total dissociation therefrom, and actual
adoption and observance of the customs, usages, practices,
rituals, and religious obligations of the original caste.
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 24 of 33




iii. There must be satisfactory and credible evidence establishing
acceptance and assimilation by the members of the original caste
and the concerned community. Mere self-proclamation is
insufficient i.e., the community must recognize and accept the
person as one of their own.
All the above three conditions are mandatory and cumulative.
The burden of proving reconversion lies entirely on the claimant,
to be proven through unimpeachable evidence. Failure to
establish even one condition renders the claim unsustainable.
f) Where a person ceases to be a member of a Scheduled Caste by virtue
of Clause 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, the loss
of such status carries with it the automatic and immediate termination
of all eligibility for statutory benefits, protections, reservations,
preferences and entitlements that are predicated upon or flow from
such membership.
g) With respect to Scheduled Tribes, this Court clarifies that unlike the
Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, the Constitution
(Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 does not prescribe religion-based
exclusion. The determination of Scheduled Tribe status, therefore,
cannot rest on conversion alone, but must turn on whether the
claimant continues to possess and is recognised for the essential
attributes of tribal identity, including customary practices, social
organisation, community life, and acceptance by the concerned tribal
community. Where conversion or subsequent conduct results in a
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 25 of 33




complete severance from the tribal way of life and loss of community
recognition, the foundational basis for Scheduled Tribes status will
stand eroded. Conversely, where such attributes demonstrably subsist
or are genuinely re-established and accepted by the tribal community,
the claim cannot be rejected mechanically. The assessment in such
cases is necessarily fact-specific and is left to the competent authority
to decide in accordance with Constitutional principles.
56) Reverting to the facts of the present case, it is not in dispute that the
appellant was originally born into the Madiga community of Scheduled Caste.
It is equally undisputed that he subsequently embraced Christianity. The
submission advanced on behalf of the appellant that he continues to retain
his Scheduled Caste status by birth notwithstanding such conversion cannot
be accepted. When the postulates enunciated hereinabove are applied to the
facts at hand, it becomes manifest that for a person to be recognised as a
member of a Scheduled Caste, he must be professing the Hindu religion or
such other religions as are expressly recognised under the Constitution
(Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950. Once the appellant converted to Christianity,
the caste status, which he earlier enjoyed as a member of the Madiga
community, stood eclipsed in the eyes of law.
57) In the present case, it is not the case of the appellant that at any stage,
he had reconverted from Christianity to his original religion or has been
accepted back into the fold of the Madiga community. On the contrary, the
evidence on record unmistakably establishes that the appellant continues to
profess Christianity and has been functioning as a Pastor for more than a
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 26 of 33




decade, conducting regular Sunday prayer meetings in different houses of the
village. It is also an admitted position that at the time of the alleged incident,
the appellant was conducting prayer meeting as a Pastor at the house of one
Doma Koti Reddy. These concurrent facts leave no room for doubt that the
appellant continues to remain a Christian on the date of the occurrence.
58) As far as the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant placing
reliance on the caste certificate is concerned, we are of the view that mere
possession of the certificate will not be of any benefit to the appellant. The
said caste certificate is mandatorily required to be in consonance with the
Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950. In this regard, we place reliance
on the decision of this Court in K.P. Manu vs. Scrutiny Committee for
13
Verification of Community Certificate , wherein a Division Bench had laid
out three mandatory tests to be established by a person who claims to be a
beneficiary of a caste certificate:
“38. In our considered opinion, three things that need to
be established by a person who claims to be a
beneficiary of the caste certificate are : (i) there must
be absolutely clear-cut proof that he belongs to the
caste that has been recognised by the Constitution
(Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950; (ii) there has been
reconversion to the original religion to which the
parents and earlier generations had belonged; and (iii)
there has to be evidence establishing the acceptance
by the community. Each aspect according to us is very
significant, and if one is not substantiated, the
recognition would not be possible. ”

(emphasis supplied)
59) From the above, it is clear that the administrative action of the State in
providing the caste certificate to the appellant cannot be in disharmony with
the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950. In the present case, we

13
(2015) 4 SCC 1
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 27 of 33




have no hesitation in holding that the appellant, having ceased to be a
member of the Madiga community upon his conversion to Christianity and
having failed to establish any subsequent reconversion, does not satisfy the
mandatory Constitutional requirement for claiming the status of Scheduled
Caste.
WHETHER THE HIGH COURT WAS RIGHT IN QUASHING PROCEEDINGS
AGAINST RESPONDENT NOS. 2 TO 7?

A. Offences alleged under the SC/ST Act
60) At the very outset, it must be unequivocally stated that the offences
registered under the SC/ST Act against respondent nos. 2 to 7 at the instance
of the appellant cannot be sustained. Having already held that the appellant
ceased to be a member of the Scheduled Caste community upon his
conversion to Christianity, he cannot subsequently invoke the provisions of
the SC/ST Act. The said statute is a special legislation enacted with the
avowed object of preventing atrocities against the members of the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes and once the foundational requirement of caste
status stands extinguished, the statutory protection thereunder is no longer
available.
61) Therefore, we are of the view that the High Court was right in holding
that the appellant has ceased to be a member of the Scheduled Caste on his
conversion to Christianity. Accordingly, the appellant cannot be a person
aggrieved under the SC/ST Act.

B. Offences alleged under the IPC

62) Before we discuss on the alleged offences under Sections 341, 506 and
323 read with Section 34 of the IPC against respondent nos. 2 to 7, it is
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 28 of 33




apposite to refer to the decision of this Court in State of Haryana vs. Bhajan
14
Lal , wherein a Division Bench of this Court had deliberated on the list of
cases, wherein power under Section 482 of the Cr.PC should be exercised by
the High Court for quashing proceedings:
“102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various
relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and
of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a
series of decisions relating to the exercise of the
extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent
powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have
extracted and reproduced above, we have given the
following categories of cases by way of illustration
wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent
abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure
the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay
down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently
channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae
and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases
wherein such power should be exercised.

(1) Where the allegations made in the first
information report or the complaint, even if they are
taken at their face value and accepted in their
entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or
make out a case against the accused.

(2) Where the allegations in the first information report
and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do
not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an
investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of
the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within
the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.

( 3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in
the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in
support of the same do not disclose the commission
of any offence and make out a case against the
accused.

(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a
cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable
offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer
without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under
Section 155(2) of the Code.

(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or
complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable
on the basis of which no prudent person can ever
reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient
ground for proceeding against the accused.

14
1992 Supp (1) SCC 335
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 29 of 33





(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any
of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under
which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the
institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or
where there is a specific provision in the Code or the
concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the
grievance of the aggrieved party.

(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended
with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is
maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for
wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to
spite him due to private and personal grudge.”

(emphasis supplied)

63) In light of the aforesaid legal parameters, we now proceed to examine
the allegations levelled against respondent nos. 2 to 7 in relation to the
offences punishable under Sections 341, 506 and 323 read with Section 34
of the IPC, as alleged to have been committed against the appellant.
64) The case of the appellant, as emerging from the complaint, is that on
the date of the incident, after offering Sunday prayers and while returning to
his residence, he was allegedly wrongfully restrained at the entrance of a
nearby hamlet by respondent nos. 2 to 7, along with approximately twenty-
five other persons. It is further alleged that his mobile phone and vehicle keys
were forcibly taken away, that he was dragged and assaulted with hands and
legs, and that threats to his life were extended.
65) The charge-sheet filed in the matter cites sixteen witnesses, including
the appellant himself. Upon consideration of the material placed on record,
the High Court, by the impugned judgment, proceeded to quash the criminal
proceedings initiated at the instance of the appellant against respondent nos.
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 30 of 33




2 to 7. In this context, we consider it appropriate to extract the relevant
reasoning of the High Court pertaining to the offences alleged under the IPC:
“38. In so far as the allegations of commission of offences
under Sections 341, 506 and 323 read with 34 of IPC is
concerned except for the statement of LW.1 there is no
other corroborating statement of any of the witnesses. On
the contrary LW.2 the wife of LW.1 would state that she
came to know about the alleged altercation and that by the
time she went there LW.1 had already started in a car with
one Pothurlanka Srinivasa Rao-LW.4 in the car belonging
to LW.3 - Addepalii Anii Kumar. She also stated that Anil
Kumar and Pothurlanka Srinivasa Rao had dropped LW.1
at her house. Both LWs.3 and 4 state that there was an
altercation and that about 30 people were questioning
LW.1 about his activities in the village and that LWs.3 and
4 intervened and pacified the situation and thereafter
dropped LW.1. LWs.3 and 4 state that about 30 people
have assembled and questioned LW.1; however, LW.5 to
LW.9 do not state so in their statement.

*

41. Similarly, except for the listed witness Nos.1 and 3 no
other witness speak about the altercation involving 30
people. Even the charge sheet does not state that 30 people
had participated in the altercation. The only person
accompanying LW.1 at the time of the alleged altercation
was LW.9, she does not state about the alleged presence of
the 30 people. All that she says in her statement recorded
on 27.01.2021 i.e., one day after the date of filing of
complaint. LW.9 stated that, she was the pillion rider of
the two wheeler which was driven by LW.1, when LW.1 and
LW.9 reached cross roads of Kothapalem Village some
people came and stopped the two wheeler stating that they
wanted to talk with the Pastor and that LW.9 was dropped
off at her house on another bike. It is also stated by LW.9
she after reaching her home, she overheard people
shouting. Later she came to know that Reddy's of
Kothapalem village have threatened LW.1 not to perform
Sunday Prayers in the village. With these allegations, the
requirements under Sections 341, 506, 323 read with 34
of IPC cannot be made out even after full fledged trial. This
Court is of the considered view that a false complaint is
filed and no purpose would be served if the petitioners are
relegated to the trial Court and to undergo the rigmarole
of trial.”


66) The allegations of wrongful restraint, hurt and criminal intimidation
rest solely on the statement of the appellant, with no independent witness
attributing any specific overt act to respondent nos. 2 to 7. LW-2 was
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 31 of 33




admittedly not present at the scene, while LW-3 and LW-4, though referring
to an altercation, stated that the situation was pacified and the appellant was
escorted away. Their version does not support any allegation of restraint,
assault or threat. The claim regarding the presence of a large unlawful
assembly is unsupported by the chargesheet or other witnesses, thereby
weakening the case of a concerted act under Section 34 of the IPC. LW-9, who
accompanied the appellant, also does not allege any assault, restraint or
intimidation; her subsequent statements are hearsay in nature. Moreover,
absence of consistent ocular testimony identifying the assailants or manner
of occurrence, does not advance the prosecution’s case.
67) Thus, we are of the view that the basic foundation in respect of
allegations of wrongful restraint, causing hurt and criminal intimidation are
not present in the material collected during investigation.
68) In Bhajan Lal (supra) and recently in Neeharika Infrastructure
15
Private Limited vs. State of Maharashtra , this Court has clearly held
that where the uncontroverted allegations and the evidence collected during
investigation do not disclose the commission of any offence, continuation of
criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law.
69) We are of the view that the High Court, upon a careful and correct
appreciation of the material on record, arrived at the conclusion that the
allegations under Sections 341, 506 and 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC
are not borne out even if the prosecution’s case is taken at its face value.

15
(2021) 19 SCC 401 (Para 33)
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 32 of 33




70) In view of the above analysis, we find no substance in the Appeal which
fails and is hereby dismissed.

…………………..........................J.
(PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA)


.………………............................J.
(MANMOHAN)

NEW DELHI;
MARCH 24, 2026.
CRIMINAL APPEAL @ SLP (CRL.) NO. 9231/2025 Page 33 of 33