Partly allowed

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

Allahabad HC18 May 2023CRLA/633/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal, the High Court set aside the summoning order dated 10.11.2022 against the appellant for offences under the S.C./S.T. Act. The court held these provisions do not apply as the appellant belongs to the Scheduled Caste community. However, the trial for count under the IPC to continue in a competent criminal court.

What did the court decide?

Summoning order dated 10.11.2022 for appellant under S.C./S.T. Act provisions 3(2)(5ka) and 3(1)(dha) set aside; case transferred to appropriate criminal court.

Smt. Minakshi Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:109010

¶2

Court No. - 81

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 633 of 2023

¶4

Appellant :- Smt. Minakshi Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Amar Jeet Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State is taken on record.

¶7

As per the communication sent by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut O.P. No.2 has been personally/sufficiently served, however, he is not represented by any Counsel.

¶8

The instant appeal under Section 14-A(1) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, has been filed by the appellants with the prayer to allow the present appeal and set aside the charge-sheet dated 25.8.2022 and cognizance/summoning order dated 10.11.2022 passed by Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Meerut as well as entire criminal proceeding of Sessions Case No. 1954 of 2022 (State Vs. Smt. Minakshi) arising out of Case Crime No. 333 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506, I.P.C. and Section 3(2) (5ka), 3(1)(dha) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015), Police Station T.P. Nagar, District- Meerut.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently submits that the special court has committed manifest illegality in summoning the appellant to face trial amongst other under offences under the relevant provisions of the S.C./S.T. Act while the appellant herself belongs to the S.C. community and by any stretch of imagination the penal provisions of S.C./S.T. Act would not be attracted against her.

¶10

It is further submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that opposite party no.2 has lodged the F.I.R. concealing this fact that the appellant herself belongs to the S.C. caste and the Investigating Officer despite being made aware of the caste of the appellant during the course of the investigation has not investigated the allegations of the FIR in right perspective and has submitted the charge-sheet by making a cursory superficial investigation.

¶11

It is also submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the caste certificate of the appellant has been verified by the State and in the supplementary counter affidavit filed today, it is has been accepted by the State that the appellant herself belongs to the S.C. community and thus the charge-sheet as well as summoning order of date 10.11.2022 is bad and is liable to be set aside.

¶12

Learned AGA however submits that it is accepted that the appellant belongs to the S.C. community but the same by itself would not sufficient to set aside the summoning order as the criminal trial pertaining to the other offences of the India Penal Code would continue against the appellant.

¶13

Be that as it may perusal of the record would reveal that FIR of this case was lodged by the opposite party no.2 against two named persons as well as three unknown ladies alleging various allegations including addressing the opposite party no.2 with castiest remarks. After investigation, the charge sheet has been submitted against the instant appellant and co-accused Sameer who has been declared Juvenile and his case has been separated and by passing the impugned summoning order the special court has summoned the appellant for trial under Sections 323, 504, 506, I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5ka), 3(1)(dha) of the S.C./S.T. Act.

¶14

This Court having regard to the submissions made before it by the learned counsel for the appellant with regard to the caste of the appellant had directed the State to verify the caste of the appellant and submitted supplementary counter affidavit today. The State in its supplementary counter affidavit has stated in specific terms that as per the caste certificate issued in favour of the appellant she belongs to the S.C. community and thus in the considered opinion of this Court, the penal provisions of S.C./S.T. Act would not be attracted against her.

¶15

Thus keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case, it is transpired that the summoning of the appellant with regard to the Sections 3(2)(5ka) and 3(1)(dha) S.C.S.T. Act has been passed illegally and these provisions would not be attracted against the appellant by virtue of she herself belonging to the S.C. Community.

¶16

In result, the appeal is partly allowed and the summoned order dated 10.11.2022 with regard to the summoning of the appellant- Smt. Minakshi w/o Chandu @ Chandra Prakash pertaining to the Sections 3(2)(5ka) and 3(1)(dha) S.C./S.T. Act is hereby set aside . The prosecution of the appellant with regard to the remaining offences of the IPC shall continue and

¶17

the other consequences shall also follow and the trial of the case shall now stand transferred to an appropriate criminal court.

¶18

Order Date :- 18.5.2023 Akbar

¶19

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AKBAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Minakshi 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

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

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

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

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