Dismissed

Karan and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC25 Aug 2023CRLA/2216/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dismissed an appeal under special leave against an order summoning seven appellants to face trial under the SC/ST Act and IPC. The court held that with injuries admitted from both sides, it was not appropriate for this court to question the trial court prior to the evidentiary phase.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is dismissed and the order of the trial court dated 10.11.2022 is confirmed.

Karan and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:172033

¶2

Court No. - 84

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2216 of 2023

¶4

Appellant :- Karan And 6 Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Nitin Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Bind

¶5

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

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

No one has put in appearance for the opp. party no. 2 though the name of his counsel appears in the cause list. Counter affidavit has also not been filed on behalf of the opp. party no. 2.

¶8

This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 10.11.2022 passed by Special Judge SC/ST Act, Farrukhabad in complaint case no. 207 of 2022, Rajveer Javav Vs. Karan and others, under sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST Act, police station Kotwali Kaimganj District Farrukhabad. By the impugned order all the appellants are summoned by trial court to face trial under the above mentioned sections.

¶9

It is argued by the learned counsel for the appellants that the complaint regarding the incident dated 28.7.2022 has been filed on false allegations. In fact, as by mistake the son of the first informant was pushed by appellant Karan. The first informant and his son thrashed appellant Karan, regarding which on 29.7.2022 the next day of the incident an NCR was lodged by appellant no. 2 Mahesh Chandra who happens to be the father of Karan, wherein after order under section 155(2) Cr.P.C., the investigation is in progress. In the present case all the 7 appellants have been bailed out, hence, the prayer is made to set aside the impugned order dated 10.11.2022.

¶10

The prayer is opposed by learned A.G.A. and it is submitted that when Anshul the son of opp. party no. 2 Rajveer Jatav was standing outside his house, he was pushed by appellant no. 1 Karan. When he was resisted, appellant Karan called his family members. All his family members/ appellants entered into the house of opp. party no. 2 and thrashed the first informant and his

¶11

family members with kicks, fists and baton. They all pelted stones and threw bricks into his house. The first informant and his family members got injured. The residents of locality came and saved the opp. party no. 2 and his family members. All the accused persons made good their escape by giving threat of life and using caste based words. The first informant gave his report at the police station concerned but his report was not written. The first informant himself was challaned under section 151 Cr.P.C. In the medical 8 injuries were found on the person of the first informant though all these injuries were found to be simple caused by blunt and hard object.

¶12

From the perusal of the record,it is found that some incident took place on 28.7.2022 at 8.30 p.m. on the spot wherein both the appellant no. 1 and opp. party no. 2 are said to have sustained injuries. The injury reports of these persons are placed before the court. The opp. party no. 2 belongs to scheduled caste and the appellants belong to backward class is an admitted fact. When the incident is admitted to both the parties and the injuries are shown to be received by both sides, in the opinion of the court, it would be decided by the trial court after the evidence of the parties as to who was the aggressor and who was the defender.

¶13

Thus, having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants and learned A.G.A. upon perusal of evidence brought on record, I don't find a good ground to allow the appeal.

¶14

The order of the trial court is well discussed, well founded and does not suffer from any illegality. Hence it needs no interference.

¶15

The appeal is accordingly dismissed. Order of trial court dated 10.11.2022 is confirmed.

¶16

Order Date :- 25.8.2023 Gss

¶17

Digitally signed by :- GIRAJA SHANKER SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Karan and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karan and 6 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

Monu @ Shivendra Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ranu Tiwari @ Devendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rakesh Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Abhinav Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vishal Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dular Singh and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another