Quashed

Shubham Patel and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Jan 2023/5/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court clarified that no limitation applies to appeals under the SC/ST Act per the Ghulam Rasool Khan judgment. It then quashed a defective summons order passed on a printed proforma, directing the Special Judge to proceed afresh.

What did the court decide?

The summons order dated 6-8-2020 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Raebareli in Sessions Trial No. 1124 of 2020 is quashed.

Shubham Patel and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 5 of 2023

¶3

Appellant :- Shubham Patel And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ranjeet Yadav,J.B. Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

( C.M.A. No. 1 of 2023: Application for condonation of delay. )

¶6

Heard Sri JB Singh, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Vijay Prakash Srivastava, Addl. Govt. Advocate-I.

¶7

In view of the order proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to the respondent No. 2 is dispensed with.

¶8

Office has reported the instant criminal appeal as defective, as it is beyond limitation of 217 days as on 2.1.2022.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellants has placed before the court a decision rendered by a full bench of this court in Ghulam Rasool Khan and ors. vs. State of UP, Criminal Appeal No. 1000 of 2018, decided on 28 July 2022 wherein the Full Bench has held that there will be no limitation to file an appeal against an order under the provisions of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 (hereinafter referred as '1989 act').

¶10

In view of the aforesaid decision of the Full Bench of this court, as there is no limitation prescribed for filing an appeal under section 14-A of the 1989 Act, the appeal is not time barred and the Stamp Reporter is directed to take note of the aforesaid judgment of the Full Bench.

¶11

( Order on Appeal )

¶12

By means of the instant appeal the appellants have prayed for setting aside the impugned summoning order dated 6-8-2020 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST) Act, Rae Bareli, in special session trial no 1124/20, State v/s Akash alias Golu chaudhary and another, arising out of Case Crime No.677/19 under Section 147, 148, 149, 452, 308, 323, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) Da, Dha of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

¶13

A perusal of the impugned summoning order indicates that it has been passed on a printed proforma by filling up the case number, parties' name and sections in the blank spaces provided

¶14

in the proforma.

¶15

This Court has repeatedly issued directions prohibiting the Courts from issuing summoning orders on printed proforma(s). One such order has been passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Pawan Kumar vs State of UP, Application under section 482 CrPC No.1099 of 2021 decided on 18.11.2021.

¶16

In view of the aforesaid discussion, the instant application is allowed . The summoning order dated 6.8.2020 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Raibareli in Sessions Trial No. 1124 of 2020 is hereby quashed .

¶17

The learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act) may proceed with the matter afresh in accordance with law.

¶18

( Subhash Vidyarthi, J. )

¶19

Order Date :- 6.1.2023 A.Nigam

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shubham Patel and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shubham Patel and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

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

Dinesh Kumar Maurya and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Uttam Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Rushil Tandon Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another

State of U.P. Vs Narendra Kumar Maurya

Alka @ Jyoti Dwivedi @ Jyoti Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Ranjeet Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others