Criminal appeal against a summons under various IPC sections and the SC/ST Act. The High Court did not find any illegality in the impugned order summoning the appellant to face trial. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
Criminal appeal No. 8706 of 2023 is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:210611
Court No. - 85
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8706 of 2023
Appellant :- Preetam @ Guru Pratap @ Guru Pratapesh Kumar Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Prakash Chandra Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ram Raksha Tiwari
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present criminal appeal has been filed against the order dated 16.07.2022 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST) Act/Additional Sessions Judge, Banda in Special Case No. 109 of 2022 arising out of case Crime No. 335 of 2022, under Sections 354, 420, 504, 506, 507 I.P.C. and 3 (2) (Va) of SC/ST Act, PS Kotwali Nagar, District Banda whereby the appellant was summoned to face trial.
It is submitted that according to the prosecution version appellant had taken Rs. 60,000/-from the informant on 4th March, 2022 on the pretext of false promise to provide her a job but no job was provided to her by the appellant. On 02.05.2022, when she demanded to return her money from the appellant, he addressed her with caste related words. It is further submitted that in fact the informant was working in the house of appellant as house cleaner on monthly salary of Rs. 3,500/- but she suddenly demanded Rs. 50,000/- from the appellant as advance stating that she wants to buy a scooty and when appellant denied for the same, she lodged a false F.I.R. against him.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. submitted that after fair investigation charge sheet has been submitted against the appellant. Appellant is named in the F.I.R. and there is specific allegations against the appellant that he had taken Rs. 60,000/-from her on 04.03.2022. The informant was medically examnined on 05.05.2022 and certain injuries were noted on her person. It is further submitted that there is no evidence that informant was working as maid of the appellant and she demanded Rs. 50,000/- as advance from him.
After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, I do not find any illegality in the impugned
order dated 16.07.2022 and the appeal is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, the criminal appeal is dismissed.
Order Date :- 2.11.2023 AKT
Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned order summoning the appellant to face trial under Sections 354, 420 IPC and 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST Act is legally unsustainable.
Whether alleged false version of the informant regarding employment status and demand of advance negates the prosecution charges.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Preetam @ Guru Pratap @ Guru Pratapesh Kumar
State of U.P.
Another
Mayank Kumar Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
