Dismissed

Jagdish Kumar Sharma and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC17 Jun 2020CRLP/5598/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioners challenged an FIR registered under IPC and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, seeking quashing and arrest stay. The Court found the allegations of insulting, abusing, and assaulting labourers engaged in MGNREGA work established an offence and rejected the petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition for quashing the FIR and stay of arrest was dismissed on 17.6.2020.

Jagdish Kumar Sharma and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5598 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Jagdish Kumar Sharma And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J. Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.

¶5

This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by Jagdish Kumar Sharma and three others, with a prayer for issuing a writ of certiorari thereby quashing first information report registered as Case Crime No. 213 of 2020, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 332 IPC and Section 3 (2) (Va) Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amended 2015), Police Station Java, District Aligarh. By way of another application, a relief for stay of arrest has also been prayed.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that first information report was lodged by respondent no. 3 for the purpose of harassing the petitioner. From the very perusal of first information report, no offence under Sections 323, 504, 506, 332 IPC and Section 3 (2) (Va) Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amended 2015), is made out against the petitioner. They are of no criminal antecedent. Hence, this petition with above prayer.

¶7

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed. Learned counsel for the complainant Shri Devendra Kumar Yadav, has filed vakalatnama on today, has also opposed this petition by arguing that these vulnerable poor labourers engaged in MANREGA activities were assaulted, they were injured but under conspiracy with police personnel neither they were got medically examined nor given any help.

¶8

Having heard the learned counsel for both sides and gone through first information report, it is apparent that first information report was got lodged as above for an occurrence which occurred on 20.5.2020, upon report of village Pradhan, who along with labourers, written in first information report, was busy in construction of Chak Road when petitioners armed with spade, Darati, Lathi and Danda rushed on the spot. They intentionally insulted, abused by taking name of caste, did assault causing obstruction of MANREGA work, being carried

¶9

on. Village Pradhan, who was getting a national scheme implemented by poors in this Covid-19 pandemic for ensuring job and means of livelihood to poor vulnerable section of society. When this obstruction and assault was made by petitioners. National scheme of welfare state is for ensuring that none of poor person be hungry. They be given job and means of livelihood. For which, MANREGA scheme is most effective in these period of pandemic and these petitioners did above occurrence which apparently is against the implementation of national scheme, as well as of offence against vulnerable poor section of society including members of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe community for which these special act was legislated by central legislation. Under all above facts and circumstances and heinousness of offence, there remains no ground of interference by this Court.

¶10

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

¶11

Order Date :- 17.6.2020 Ravi Prakash

Jagdish Kumar Sharma and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagdish Kumar Sharma and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Rachna Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Ashutosh Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Siraj Alias Mahmuwar Rahman and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ajit Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mahak Khan and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Vishal Yadav and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others