Partly allowed

Sonu and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC20 Sept 2023CRLA/2181/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal appeal challenging cognizance orders under the SC/ST Act. The High Court held that ingredients of the section were missing as caste-based words and intent were not disclosed in initial statements, only in additional ones, thereby setting aside cognizance under the SC/ST Act sections but confirming them under IPC sections.

What did the court decide?

Cognizance under Sections 3(1)(Da) and 3(1)(Dha) of the SC/ST Act is set aside; cognizance under IPC sections is confirmed.

Sonu and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:182900

¶2

Court No. - 84

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2181 of 2022

¶4

Appellant :- Sonu And 2 Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Prakash Chandra Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Vivek Singh Yadav,Shyam Lal,Vivek Singh Yadav

¶5

Hon'ble Mrs. Sadhna Rani (Thakur),J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A. for the State, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and perused the record.

¶7

This is an appeal filed against the orders dated 01.09.2021 and 16.03.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Jalaun at Orai in S.T. No.0127 of 2021, Case Crime No.0032 of 2021 (State of U.P. Vs. Chhote Lal and others), under Sections 147, 336, 323, 325, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3 (1) (r) (s) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Nadigaon, District Jalaun.

¶8

Vide order dated 01.09.2021, the cognizance against the appellants along with co-accused persons had been taken by the trial court under Sections 147, 336, 323, 504, 325 I.P.C. and Sections 3(1)(Da) and 3(1)(Dha) of SC/ST Act. Vide order dated 16.03.2022, the trial court issued process against appellants in the light of cognizance order dated 01.09.2021. Though, the cognizance has been taken against the appellants along with other co-accused persons under various sections of Indian Penal Code along with Sections 3(1)(Da) and 3(1)(Dha) of SC/ST Act, but learned counsel for the appellants only challenged the cognizance under Sections 3(1)(Da) and 3(1)(Dha) of SC/ST Act.

¶9

The cognizance under Sections 147, 336, 323, 504, 325 I.P.C. against the appellants has not been challenged by filing this appeal, hence the cognizance under above mentioned sections against the appellants is confirmed. So for as the Sections 3(1)(Da) and 3(1) (Dha) of SC/ST Act are concerned, it is argued that in the F.I.R. or in the statements of first informant - Sonu and in the statements of injured Prahlad, Ashok, Pushpendra and Devendra, there is no allegation of an offence committed under Section 3 (1) (r) (s) of SC/ST Act. For the first time, the application dated 15.06.2021

¶10

was moved by Pushpendra Kumar - injured before S.H.O. of concerned police station that he (Pushpendra) belongs to SC/ST community and sections of SC/ST Act have not been imposed against the accused persons. Hence, by giving additional statement, injured - Pushpendra made a prayer to add the sections of SC/ST Act in the case. Further, in the additional statement of first informant - Sonu and in the additional statement of Pushpendra, it has come that the accused persons used caste based words but the caste based words have not been disclosed in the additional statements of the first informant and injured - Pushepndra. Hence, the prayer is made to set aside the cognizance taken by the trial court under the sections of SC/ST Act.

¶11

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposed the prayer and submitted that in the additional statements of first informant and injured - Pushpendra, it has come that the appellants humiliated the first informant and the injured persons by using caste based words, hence the cognizance under Sections 3 (1) (Da) and 3 (1) Dha of SC/ST Act is quite proper.

¶12

From perusal of Sections 3 (1) Da and 3 (1) Dha of SC/ST Act, it is clear that the cognizance under these sections can only be taken if the abuses and the caste based words are used intentionally to insult or intimidate or humiliate a person of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe in any place within the public view.

¶13

In the present case, there is no mention of using any caste based words in the F.I.R. or in the initial statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of the first informant and all the injured persons. It has come only in the additional statements of the first informant and injured - Pushpendra that the caste based words were also hurled by the appellants but neither what caste based words were hurled has been disclosed even in the additional statement of these persons nor it has been disclosed that the caste based words or caste based abuses were used with the intention to insult or intimidate the first informant and the injured persons because of their belonging to the SC/ST community.

¶14

In the opinion of the Court, the ingredients of offence under Section 3 (1) (r) (s) of the SC/ST Act are missing, hence, the cognizance taken by the trial court under Section 3 (1) Da and Dha of SC/ST Act is against the provisions of statute. The appeal is allowed with regard to Sections 3 (1) Da and Dha of SC/ST Act and the appeal is rejected with regard to Sections of Indian Penal Code. Impugned order dated 01.09.2021 is confirmed with regard to cognizance under Sections 147, 336, 323, 325, 504 I.P.C. and

¶15

impugned order dated 01.09.2021 is set aside with regard to Section 3 (1) (r) (s) of SC/ST Act, 1989. So for as the order dated 16.03.2022 is concerned, it is nothing but the issuance of simple process in compliance of order dated 01.09.2021, so the prayer to set aside order dated 01.09.2021 is however rejected.

¶16

The appeal is thus allowed partly .

¶17

Order Date :- 20.9.2023 Atul

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sonu and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu and 2 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

Mohan Lal Kori Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Raj Kumar Maurya and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aun Raza Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rohit Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Mansha Prasad Singh and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vivek Vashistha Vs State of U.P. and Another