Dismissed

Virendra Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC24 May 2023CRLA/4653/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an appeal seeking to set aside an order declining the appellants' discharge application in a case under the SC/ST Act. The court held that disputed questions of fact regarding the accused's knowledge of the victim's caste are for trial and cannot halt the proceedings at the discharge stage.

What did the court decide?

The criminal appeal was dismissed; the Special Court was directed to proceed with the trial without adjournments.

Virendra Singh and Another Vs State of U.P… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:115638

¶2

Court No. - 81

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4653 of 2023 Appellant :- Virendra Singh And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Himanshu Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed by the appellant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Shri Himanshu Mishra, learned counsel for the appellants 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 Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been moved by the appellants, namely, Virendra Singh and Mukesh with the prayer to allow the instant criminal appeal and to set aside the impugned order dated 15.04.2023 passed by the Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Mathura in Discharge Application of Special Sessions Case No.679 of 2021 (State Vs. Virendra and others), arising out of Case Crime No.393 of 2020, under Sections 332, 353, 427, 504, 506 I.P.C. & 3(1) Da, Dha, 3(2) (5) of the SC/ST Act, Police Station Jamunapar, District Mathura.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellants has made various submissions in order to demonstrate that even if the case of the prosecution is believed as it is even then provisions of S.C./S.T. Act may not be attracted as the Peon, who was accompanying the civil court Ameen, was not known to the appellants from before the alleged incident and in absence of knowledge that the Peon, who was accompanying the Ameen belongs to the scheduled caste and requisite intention required for invocation of Section 3(1)(R) of the S.C./S.T. Act was not present and this aspect of the matter has not been taken care of by the special court while passing the impugned order of date 15.04.2023 and thus the same is liable to be set aside.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that there is no illegality in the order of the special court as a very limited exercise of sifting the material/evidence collected by the investigating officer during the course of investigation, is provided to the special court or magistrate as the case may be at the stage of discharge/framing of charge and it was not permissible for the special court to have minutely appreciated the material or evidence

¶10

available on record as well as the same can only be done during the course of trial, thus there is no illegality or to say any irregularity in the impugned order.

¶11

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record and keeping in view the order intended to be passed, the service of notice on opposite party no.2 is hereby dispensed with

¶12

Perusal of the record would reveal that it is admitted to the appellants that the appellants have secured regular bail in the instant case. On a discharge application moved by the appellants, the impugned order of date 15.04.2023 has been passed. The main thrust of the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants is with regard to the fact that as the Peon, who was allegedly accompanying the civil court Ameen at the time of alleged incident, was not known to the appellants from before the alleged incident and the requisite intention required for invocation of 3(1)(R) of the S.C./S.T. Act was absent. The law with regard to the discharge or framing of charge is now no more res integra and the same has been set at rest by catena of judgements passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court and it is settled that at the stage of framing of charge, the material, which has been collected by the investigating officer (so far as the cases based on filing of Police Report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. is concerned) is to be taken into consideration with a limited discretion to the trial court or magistrate as the case may be to sift the material or evidence in order to ascertain sufficiency of material for the purpose of proceeding further. There cannot be mini trial within a trial. The fact whether the Peon, who at the time of alleged incident is shown to be accompanying the civil court Ameen, was known to the appellants from before the alleged incident, is a disputed question of fact, which could only be decided during the course of trial and thus on this basis alone the criminal trial may not be culminated as a threshold.

¶13

Thus, keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case and also keeping an eye that whatever submissions have been raised before this Court are the disputed questions of fact, I do not find force in the appeal and in the result the same is dismissed .

¶14

However, the special court is directed to proceed with the trial with utmost expedition without granting soft adjournment to either party.

¶15

Order Date :- 24.5.2023/Anupam S/-

¶16

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM SINGH PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Virendra Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virendra Singh and Another 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

Md. Lateef and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shobh Nath Pal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Girish Sharma and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pawan Alias Pawan Kumar Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajdeep @ Shippu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sita Devi Vs State of U.P. and 9 Others