Dismissed

Ved Prakash and 2 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC25 Sept 2019CRLA/5938/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge criminal appeal sought to quash proceedings regarding alleged caste-based abuse and assault. The court rejected the appeal, finding a prima facie case based on FIR allegations and refused quashing, while directing bail consideration upon surrender.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings was refused; bail to be considered if appellants surrender.

Ved Prakash and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5938 of 2019

¶3

Appellant :- Ved Prakash And 2 Ors. Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Appellant :- Dhiraj Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This criminal appeal has been filed by the appellants with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings of Misc. Case No.09 of 2019 (Neelam Vs. Ved Prakash and others), arising out of Case Crime No.108 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)(Da), 3(1) (Dha) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Saharanpur.

¶7

As per the allegations made in the FIR, it is alleged that on 24.01.2019, the appellants abused the victim with the name of her caste with an intention to humiliate and intimidate her and forcibly entered in her house and also assaulted her by kicks and fists and danda and on account of assault made by the appellants, victims suffered injuries and have been medically examined.

¶8

On the basis of the FIR, police investigated the matter and submitted the final report against the appellants. On getting information about the submission of final report, appellants appeared and filed a protest petition.

¶9

The court below, after taking into consideration the entire material collected during the course of investigation and looking to the injury caused to the victims, had rejected the final report and summoned the appellants to face trial.

¶10

Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation, no offence is disclosed against the appellants and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶11

Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the appellants and as such, entire criminal proceedings cannot be quashed.

¶12

Moreover, at this stage, only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cri.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para10) 2005 SCC (Cri.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

¶13

The prayer for quashing the entire criminal proceedings is therefore refused.

¶14

However, it is directed that if the appellants appear/surrender before the court below and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided as expeditiously as possible after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties.

¶15

With the aforesaid observations, this criminal appeal is finally disposed of.

¶16

Order Date :- 25.9.2019 Nadim

Ved Prakash and 2 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ved Prakash and 2 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Om Prakash Alias Omi Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Samoyal Khan @ Bantu Khan Vs State of U.P. and Anothers

Dinesh Pratap Singh and 6 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Ravi Upadhayay Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Km. Ritu Darbari @ Ritu and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Diwakar Chaudhary and Anr. Vs State of Up and Anr.