Partly allowed

Raj Karan @ Darbari Lal and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Apr 2023CRLA/10373/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against summoning order under SC/ST Act. Court held that because the incident allegedly occurred inside the house and not in a public place, the specific offences under sections 3(1)(da) and 3(1)(dha) of the SC/ST Act did not disclose a prima facie case, but other offences under IPC sections 504 and 506 were sustained.

What did the court decide?

Summons to the extent of offences under sections 3(1)(da) and 3(1)(dha) of SC/ST Act quashed; offences under sections 504 and 506 IPC upheld.

Raj Karan @ Darbari Lal and 3 Others… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 93

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 10373 of 2022

¶3

Appellant :- Raj Karan @ Darbari Lal And 3 Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ambrish Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J.

¶5

1. Despite service of notice, no one is present on behalf of respondent no.2.

¶6

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

3. This appeal has been preferred under section 14-A (1) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred as SC/ST Act) to quash the entire proceeding of S.T. No.404 of 2021 and summoning order dated 25.07.2022 passed by Special Judge SC/ST Act, Chitrakoot, under Sections 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)da, 3(1)dha of SC/St Act, Police Station Pahadi, District Chitrakoot.

¶8

4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants are innocent and have not committed the present offences. It is further submitted that the present prosecution was launched by the first informant against the appellants due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the alleged incident took place inside the house. It is further submitted that no case under SC/ST Act is made out against the appellants. It is further submitted that incident did not take place in the public place. It is next submitted that there is no sufficient ground in the case to proceed against the appellants for the aforesaid offences. It is next submitted that the summoning order is vague and illegal and the

¶9

same is not sustainable in the eye of law. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that the impugned summoning order, whereby the appellants have been summoned is against facts and law and thus, liable to be set aside.

¶10

5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the appeal and argued that there are clear allegations against the appellants. It is further submitted that in the complaint there are allegations against the appellants that they have abused the complainant by using caste indicative words and they have assaulted her. It was submitted that in view of material on record, a prima facie case, including the case under Section (3)(1)(da) and 3(1)(dha) SC/ST Act, is made out.

¶11

6. I have considered rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record.

¶12

7. So far the summoning order dated 25.07.2022 is concerned, by that order the appellants have been summoned. It may be observed that at the stage of summoning, the court is not to analyse reliability of the material on record. The evidentiary value and its credibility has to be considered at the stage of trial. Marshalling and appreciation of evidence is not in the domain of the court at that point of time. At this stage of consideration of material available on record, the court has to proceed with an assumption that the material brought on record by complainant is true and such material and documents have to be considered with a view to find out whether the facts emerging from such material when taken at their face value disclose the existence of all the ingredients constituting the offence.

¶13

8. Keeping aforesaid legal position in view, in the instant case,

¶14

from the perusal of record, it is apparent that criminal appeal has been filed on the ground that offences against the accused persons are alleged to have taken place inside the house, therefore, offences under SC/ST Act are made out against the appellants. Thus, it has to be seen whether the alleged incident of abusing and humiliating the complainant took place inside the house or there is no evidence that the complainant and was abused or humiliated by the accused persons in place within public view. The basic ingredients of the offence under section (3)(1)(da) and 3(1)(dha) of the Act are intentional insults or intimidation with intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe and in any place within public view. All insults or intimidation to a person will not be an offence under the SC/ST Act unless such insult or intimidation is on account of victim belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. From the F.I.R. as well as material collected during enquiry disclose that the alleged incident took place inside the house. Thus, in the instant case no prima facie case under section 3(1)(da) and 3(1)(dha) of the SC/ST Act is made out. However, so far the ground for framing of charge of accused-appellants for the other offences is concerned, in view of material discussed above a prima facie case for the same is made out.

¶15

9. In view of aforesaid, the impugned order to the extent of offences under 3(1)(da) 3(1)(dha) of the SC/ST Act is quashed. The impugned order so far as it relates to the offences against the accused appellants under section 504, 506 IPC is upheld. The impugned order stands altered to this extent.

¶16

10. Appeal disposed off in above terms.

¶17

Order Date :- 6.4.2023//Sanjeet

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SANJEET KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Raj Karan @ Darbari Lal and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Karan @ Darbari Lal and 3 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

Prabhat Kumar Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raees and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vedpal and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mrs. Kajal Agarwal @ Simmi Agarwal and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sunil Kumar Nishad and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Greesh Gupta and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others