Allowed

Sheetla Prasad Harijan Alias Sheetla Prasad and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. and Others

Allahabad HC13 Jul 2022/4189/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application filed to quash proceedings under the SC/ST Act and IPC based on a compromise. The Court allowed the application holding that the underlying objective of the Act would not be contravened by quashing in view of the settlement expressed by the parties.

What did the court decide?

Entire proceedings of S.C./S.T. Sessions Case No.22 of 2021 and the impugned charge-sheet No.277 of 2020 are quashed.

Sheetla Prasad Harijan Alias Sheetla Prasad and Others Vs… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4189 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sheetla Prasad Harijan Alias Sheetla Prasad And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A., representing respondent no.1-State, as well as Mr. Avadhesh Mishra, Advocate, who has put in appearance on behalf of respondent no.2.

¶6

Vakalatnama filed on behalf of respondent no. 2 is taken on record.

¶7

This petition under Section 482 CrPC has been filed for quashing of entire proceedings of S.C./S.T. Sessions Case No.22 of 2021 'State Vs. Sheetla Prasad and others' arising out of FIR/Crime No.0274 of 2020, under Sections 147, 447, 323, 427, 504, 506 IPC, read with Sections 3(1) (da) (dha) SC/ST Act lodged at Police Station Baskhari, District Ambedkar Nagar, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ambedkar Nagar, as well as impugned charge-sheet No.277 of 2020 dated 14.10.2020 submitted under Sections 147, 447, 323, 427, 504, 506 IPC against petitioner Nos.1 to 3 and under Sections 147, 447, 323, 427, 504, 506 IPC, read with Sections 3(1) (da) (dha) SC/ST Act against petitioner Nos.4 and 5.

¶8

The impugned proceedings has been sought to be quashed on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties, which has been reduced in writing and terms & conditions. Parties have submitted that they have entered into compromise without any force, coercion or undue influence.

¶9

On behalf of the applicants, it is submitted that in light of judgment of the Supreme Court reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 966 ( Ramawater Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh ) even the offence under Section 3(1) (da) (dha) SC/ST Act can be quashed if the parties enter into a compromise.

¶10

I have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for

¶11

the parties.

¶12

The offence against the applicants is trivial in nature except offence under Section 3(1) (da) (dha) SC/ST Act. The Supreme Court in Ramawater Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (supra) has held as under:-

¶13

" 16. On the other hand, where it appears to the Court that the offence in question, although covered under the SC/ST Act, is primarily private or civil in nature, or where the alleged offence has not been committed on account of the caste of the victim, or where the continuation of the legal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law, the Court can exercise its powers to quash the proceedings. On similar lines, when considering a prayer for quashing on the basis of a compromise/settlement, if the Court is satisfied that the underlying objective of the Act would not be contravened or diminished even if the felony in question goes unpunished, the mere fact that the offence is covered under a ?special statute? would not refrain this Court or the High Court, from exercising their respective powers under Article 142 of the Constitution or Section 482 Cr.P.C."

¶14

Considering the fact that the parties have put their dispute behind and decided to live peacefully by entering into compromise, I find that this case is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Ramawater Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (supra). Thus, this application is allowed.

¶15

Consequently, entire proceedings of S.C./S.T. Sessions Case No.22 of 2021 'State Vs. Sheetla Prasad and others' arising out of FIR/Crime No.0274 of 2020, under Sections 147, 447, 323, 427, 504, 506 IPC, read with Sections 3(1) (da) (dha) SC/ST Act lodged at Police Station Baskhari, District Ambedkar Nagar, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ambedkar Nagar, as well as impugned charge-sheet No.277 of 2020 dated 14.10.2020 submitted under Sections 147, 447, 323, 427, 504, 506 IPC against petitioner Nos.1 to 3 and under Sections 147, 447, 323, 427, 504, 506 IPC, read with Sections 3(1) (da) (dha) SC/ST Act against

¶16

petitioner Nos.4 and 5, are hereby quashed.

¶17

( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J. )

¶18

Order Date :- 13.7.2022 prateek

¶19

Digitally signed by PRATEEK ARORA Date: 2022.07.13 18:38:13 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sheetla Prasad Harijan Alias Sheetla Prasad and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheetla Prasad Harijan Alias Sheetla Prasad and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. and Others

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

Dharmagya Misra Vs State of U.P.

Narendra Kumar Verma Vs the State of U.P. and Another

M/S Pati Ram Educational Society, Lucknow Thru. Secy. Dr. Meeta Singh Vs State Thru. Central Bureau of Investigation (Cbi)

Mushtaque Ali Vs State of U.P. and Ors.

Dr. Hargovind Bhargava and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P.

Rafiq Ahamad Vs State of U.P.Thru.Addl.Chief Secy.Home and Others