Suman v. State of U.P. and 7 Others
Case brief
What is this about?
Appellant challenged rejection of Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. application in an atrocity case. Court affirmed Special Court's order, finding no illegality as duty-bound investigation is not compulsion in every case, but directed trial court to follow law strictly if appellant files a fresh complaint.
What did the court decide?
Impugned order dated 21.11.2022 affirmed; appeal disposed with direction to trial court to proceed strictly in law if appellant files a new complaint.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 81
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1136 of 2023
Appellant :- Suman Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Arun Kumar Vishvakarma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ashutosh Pandey
Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.
Heard Shri Arun Kumar Vishvakarma, learned counsel for the appellant, Shri Ashutosh Pandey, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.2 as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.
The instant appeal under Section 14-A(1) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant namely Suman with the prayer to set-aside the impugned order dated 21.11.2022 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Additional Session Judge, Agra in Criminal Misc. Case No. 693 of 2022 (Suman Vs. Ramu and others) Police Station- Shahganj, District- Agra whereby application filed the appellant under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was rejected.
Learned counsel for the appellant while drawing the attention of this Court towards the impugned order dated 21.11.2022, whereby the application moved by the appellant under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. has been rejected/dismissed by the special court, vehemently submits that the trial court/special court had committed manifest illegality in rejecting the request of the appellant for investigation of the allegations mentioned therein and the order whereby the request of the appellant to get the allegations investigated is rejected is liable to be set aside.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the rejection of application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. by the Special Court constitutes a manifest illegality.
Whether the Special Court is duty bound to take cognizance of offences under SC/ST Act under Section 190(1)(a) Cr.P.C.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Suman
- respondent
State Of U.P.
- respondent
Ramu
- respondent
Other Respondents
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · May
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRLA/1136/2023
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court