Parmatma Yadav @ Parmatma Ram Harakh Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:108428

Court No. - 81

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4282 of 2023

Appellant :- Parmatma Yadav @ Parmatma Ram Harakh Yadav And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Shyam Lal Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Mujiburrahman

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Shyam Lal, learned counsel for the appellants and Shri Musheer Khan holding brief for Shri Mujiburrahman, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A(1) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocitis) Act, 1989 has been moved by the appellants, namely, Parmatma Yadav @ Parmatma Ram Harakh and Daya Shankar Yadav with the prayer to allow the instant criminal appeal and quash the impugned summoning order dated 07.09.2022 passed by Exclusive Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Siddharth Nagar as well as the impugned charge sheet dated 09.07.2022 including the entire proceedings of Special Session Case No. 453/2022, State Vs. Parmatma Yadav @ Parmatma Ram Harakh Yadav and others in Case Crime No. 34/2022, under Sections 323, 325, 504 IPC and 3(1) (D), 3(1) (DH), 3(2) (Va) SC/ST Act, Police Station Pathra Bazar, District Siddharth Nagar, pending before the Exclusive Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Siddharth Nagar.

¶8

Learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.2 submits that the instant appeal is barred by limitation, having regard to the period of limitation provided under Section 14-A(3) of the SC/ST Act.

¶9

Having regard to the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in Ghulam Rasool Khan others Vs. State of U.P. and others in Criminal Appeal No. 1000 of 2018, Decided on July 28, 2022 the submission of opposite party no.2 is not having any force. For ready reference the operative portion of Full Bench pertaining to the limitation provided for filing of any appeal is reproduced as under:-

¶10

" Question No. (IV)- There will be no limitation to file an

¶11

appeal against an order under the provisions of 1989 Act. Hence, the remedies can be availed of as provided.

¶12

Learned cousnel for the appellants while drawing the attention of this Court towards the FIR bearing Case Crime No. 34/2022 as well as an Online Complaint made by him and report submitted by the S.H.O. of Police Station Pathra Bazar, District Siddharth Nagar on 3.7.2022, a copy of which has been placed at page no. 117 of the paper book, vehemently submits that some altercation might have taken place between the family members of one Tej Ram and informant of this case, namely, Shesh Ram and pertaining to which cross FIRs have been lodged by the parties against each other. However, the appellants who are not having any role and motive have been wrongly arrayed as accused persons by the informant of the instant case in the First Information Report of this case.

¶13

It is further submitted that even if the contents of the FIR are believed the relevant provisions of SC/ST Act my not attract against the appellants as nothing has been alleged in the First Information Report on the basis of which relevant penal provisions of SC/ST may be attracted.

¶14

It is also submitted that in view of above, the submission of charge sheet as well as taking of cognizance by the special court as well as summoning is bad and is liable to be set aside.

¶15

Learned AGA has however supported the impugned summoning order.

¶16

Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 submits that so far as making of inquiry by S.H.O. is concerned the same is perse illegal and during the course of pendency of investigation it was not obligatory on the part of the S.H.O. of the Police Station Pathra Bazar to have carried an inquiry and the same appears to have been conducted in the matter with the connivance of appellants.

¶17

It is also submitted that after thorough investigation charge sheet has been filed and specific role of assault has been attributed to the instant appellants and so much so 5 persons have sustained injuries of such a nature which may not be self inflicted.

¶18

It is also submitted that at the stage of summoning the prima facie case is required to be seen and in depth and detailed discussion is not required, thus no illegality has been committed either by the Investigating Officer or by the Special Court in submitting the charge sheet and taking cognizance and also in

¶19

issuing process.

¶20

Having heard learned cousnel for the parties and having perused the record, it would be evident that with regard to the single incident allegedly occurred on 4.6.2022 at 7.30 p.m. the cross First Information Reports have been lodged by the parties against each other. So far as this case is concerned about 5 persons are shown to have sustained injuries and the perusal of the injury reports placed on record it would reveal that these injuries may not be self inflicted. Which party is aggressor could only be ascertained after full trial and keeping in view the submissions raised on behalf of the appellants the criminal prosecution cannot be culminated at threshold having regard to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Gujrat Vs Afroz Mohammed Hasanfatta reported in MANU/SC/0139/2019 .

¶21

Thus keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case, in the considered opinion of this Court there was sufficient material available before the Special Court to take cognizance in the relevant provisions of SC/ST Act and Indian Penal Code and to have summoned the appellants to face trial under relevant provisions, as specific role of assault was attributed to them. In result the appeal fails and is dismissed, as such.

¶22

At this juncture learned cousnel for the appellants submits that the appellants be given liberty to appear/ surrender before the Special Court with consequential directions to dispose of their bail application in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and others : (2021) 10 SCC 773.

¶23

Having regard to the request made on behalf of the appellants, it is provided that if the appellants appear/ surrender before the trial court within 15 days from today and move applications for regular bail under Sections 437/ 439 Cr.P.C., the trial court shall be under obligation to dispose of the same after providing opportunity of hearing to the parties, strictly in accordance with law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil (supra) with utmost expedition.

¶24

Order Date :- 18.5.2023 Muk

¶25

Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Parmatma Yadav @ Parmatma Ram Harakh Yadav and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parmatma Yadav @ Parmatma Ram Harakh Yadav and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Amar Maurya and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramdas and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikram Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Minakshi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Peer Mohammad @ Peeru and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Musabbar Ali @ Mussawar Ali and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another