Dismissed

Amar Singh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Oct 2019CRLA/5951/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an appeal against the rejection of an application for discharge under CrPC Section 227. The court held that prima facie an offence was disclosed based on FIR allegations and injury injuries, reiterating that the discharge stage only requires finding grounds to presume guilt.

What did the court decide?

Criminal appeal for quashing order of rejection of discharge application dismissed. Direction to consider bail application expeditiously upon surrender.

Amar Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5951 of 2019

¶3

Appellant :- Amar Singh And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Manu Singh 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 against the order dated 18.06.2019 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Varanasi in Special Trial No.154 of 218 (State Vs.Amar Singh and others) arising out of Case Crime No.281 of 2018, under Sections 147, 323, 352, 325, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)(Da) & (Dha) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Karkhana, District, Deoria, by which the application for discharge under Section 227 has been rejected.

¶7

Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the injuries found on the person of the victims are false, manipulated and self inflicted and they have been falsely implicated in the present case, however the court below has not appreciated the material on record in right perspective and has illegally rejected their discharged application.

¶8

Per contra, learned AGA has supported the impugned order and has stated that from the averment made in the FIR, the material collected during the course of investigation and looking to the injuries of the victim, at this stage, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the appellants and the court below has rightly rejected the appellants' application for discharge.

¶9

Having heard rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties and taken into consideration the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during the course of investigation at this stage, it cannot be said that prima facie no offence is disclosed against the appellants. The injuries sustained by the victim at this stage cannot be said to be manipulated and self inflicted when the evidence in this regard is yet to come. Specific allegation of abusing the victim with the name of his caste with an intention to humiliate and intimidate him in public view has been alleged.

¶10

It is also to be noted that at the stage of discharge the court has to consider the material only with a view to find out if there is a ground for 'presuming' that the accused had committed the offence :

¶11

"It is trite that at the stage of framing of charge, the court is required to evaluate the material and documents on record with a view to finding out if the facts emerging therefrom, taken at their face value,

¶12

disclose the existence of all the ingredients constituting the alleged offence or offences. For this limited purpose, the court may sift the evidence as it cannot be expected even at the initial stage to accept as gospel truth all that the prosecution states. At this stage, the court has to consider the material only with a view to find out if there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence and not for the purpose of arriving at the conclusion that it is not likely to lead to a conviction."

¶13

"Section 227 itself contains enough guidelines as to the scope of enquiry for the purpose of discharging an accused. It provides that the judge shall discharge when he considers that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. The ground in the context is not a ground for conviction, but a ground for putting the accused on trial. It is in the trial, the guilt or the innocence of the accused will be determined and not at the time of framing of charge. The court, therefore, need not undertake an elaborate enquiry in sifting and weighing the material. Nor is it necessary to delve deep into various aspects. All that the court has to consider is whether the evidentiary material on record. If generally accepted, would reasonably connect the accused with the crime."

¶14

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer for quashing the impugned order is liable to be rejected.

¶15

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.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 17.10.2019

¶18

Zafar

Amar Singh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amar Singh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raj Bahadure Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Santosh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bauwa @ Narendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mathura and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Vishram and Another Vs State of Up and Anr.

Kalika Prasad Vs State of U.P. and Another