Sateera Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

By means of instant appeal preferred under Section 14-A(1) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short "SC/ST Act"), the appellant has assailed the order dated 05.04.2024 passed by the Special Judge SC/ST Act/ Additional Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur Kheri (in short "trial court"), whereby, the trial court rejected the application filed under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. by the appellant registered as Crl. Misc. Case No. 93 of 2024 (Sateera Versus Sukai and Others).

¶11

Brief facts of the case are to the effect that an application dated 29.01.2024 under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was preferred by the appellant registered as Crl. Misc. Case No. 93 of 2024 (Sateera Versus Sukai and Others), and according to the same, in brief, neighbors of the appellant namely Sukoi, aged about 40 years, his mother, aged about 60 years, and his wife, aged about 30 years,

¶12

2

¶13

assaulted the appellant and her two sons and one daughter with kicks and fists and lathi/danda on account of some altercation took place between the sons of the appellant and Sukoi.

¶14

The trial court upon due consideration of the fact including the reasons indicated in the police report as also the allegations levelled by the appellant under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., rejected the application preferred by the appellant, by its order dated 05.04.2024. The order dated 05.04.2024 on reproduction reads as under:-

¶15

" स्तुतप्ቔावलीधारा 156(3) द०्ቚ०सं०परआदेशहेतुपेशहुई।्ቚ ाቕኌ�नी केविव्ቛानअधिधव्ሹाको्ቚ ा�!नाप्ቔ परपूव! मेंसुनाजाचुकाहैत�ा्ቚ प्ቔों काअवलोकनविकया। ाቕኌ�नीसतीरापत्नीहोलीधोबीने्ቚ ा�!नाप्ቔ धारा 156(3) द०्ቚ०सं० विवप्ቌीगणसुकईउ्቞ लगभग 40 व्ቧ!, नामअ्ሺातउ्቞ लगभग 30 व्ቧ! लगभग 60 पत्नीसुकईवनामअ्ሺातउ्቞ व्ቧ! पत्नीइतवारीकेविवरू्ቍ इसआशयकाविदयाहैविक्ቚ ाቕኌ�नीधोबीजाधितकीहै।घटनाविद० 26.01.2024 की 12.00 बजेविदनकीहैजब्ቚ ाቕኌ�नीकेब्ሴोंव विवप्ቌीगणकेब्ሴोंकेबीचझगड़ाहुआवशोरपर्ቚ ाቕኌ�नीकादूसरापु्ቔ मुकेशजबअपनेभाईकाबचानेआयातोउ्ሹ विवप्ቌीगणोंनेदोनोंलड़कों कोमारनेपीटनेकेलिलएदौड़ालिलयात�ा्ቚ ाቕኌ�नी केघरमेंघुसआये त�ाघरकेअन्दरविवप्ቌीगणने्ቚ ाቕኌ�नीकेदोनोलड़को, ाቕኌ�नीकीपु्ቔी ीतीव्ቚ ाቕኌ�नीकोलाठी-डण्डोंएवंलात-घूसोंसेमारापीटा।शोरपरगांव केलोगआगए।विवप्ቌीगणने्ቚ ाቕኌ�नीवउसकेब्ሴोंकोमांबहनकी गन्दी-गन्दीगालिलयांदेतेहुएत�ाजाधितसूचकशब्दोंसेअपमाविनतविकया त�ापूरेपरिरवारकोजानसेमारदेनेकीधमकीदेकरचलेगए।्ቚ ाቕኌ�नीने �ानाधौरहरामें्ቚ ा�!नाप्ቔ विदयािሗकतुकोईकाय!वाहीनहींकीगई।विद०29.01.2024 ा�!ना को्ቦ ीमानजिजलाधिधकारीखीरीकोउनकेकाया!लयमें्ቚ प्ቔ रिरसीबकराकरविदयावपुलिलसअधी्ቌकखीरीकोपंजीकृतडाकसे वि्ቧतकरके्ቚ ा�!नाप्ቔ विदयाविकन्तुआजतक्ቚ ाቕኌ�नीकीनतोरिरपोट! दज! कीगईिሗकतुकोईकाय!वाहीनहींकीगयी।

¶16

�ानेसे्ቚ ा्቎ आख्यानुसारउ्ሹ घटनाकेसंदभ! में�ानाहाजापरकोई अभिभयोगपंजीकृतनहींहैव�ानेकीआख्यानुसार्ቚ स्तुत्ቚ करणमेंविद०26.01.2024 कोप्ቌकारोंकेमध्यध्वजारोहणकेसमयकहासुनीहुई जिजसपरगांववालोंनेबीच-बचावविकया�ाऔरगांववालोंकेसम्ቌ एक तहरीरभीतैयारकीगई�ी, जिजसपरगांवकेबहुत- सेलोगोंकेहस्ता्ቌर भीहै।विद०-31.01.2024 कोतैयारतहरीरकीफोटो्ቚ धितभीसंल्ሿ है जिजसमेंयहस्प्ቖ उ्ቤेखहैविद०- 26.01.2024 कोध्वजारोहणकेसमय

¶17

3

¶18

ब्ሴोंमेंमामूलीकहासूनीहुई�ीजिजसकेप्ቐात्आवेविदकावउसकीलड़की नेविवप्ቌीसुकईकेघरजाकरगाली-गलौजविकया�ाऔरझूठेमुकदमेंमें फंसानेकीधमकीदी�ी।

¶19

प्ቔावलीकेअवलोकनसेयहस्प्ቖ हैविकआवेविदकानेविवप्ቌीसं०-1 40 30 सुकईउ्቞ व्ቧ! उसकीपत्नीउ्቞ व्ቧ! त�ाउसकीमाताउ्቞ 60 व्ቧ! कोअभिभयु्ሹ बनायाहैऔरयहक�नविकयाहैविकविद०- 26.01.2024 कोसमय 12.00 बजेदोनोप्ቌ केब्ሴोंकेबीचझगड़ाहुआ�ा, जिजससे नाराजहोकरउ्ሹ विवप्ቌीगणउसकेलड़कोकोमारनेलगेऔरजबलड़के भागकरघरआएतोविवप्ቌीगणपीछेसेदौड़तेहुए्ቚ ाቕኌ�नीकेघरमेंघुस आएऔरमार-पीटविकयात�ाजाधितसूचकगालिलयांदीऔरजानसेमारने कीधमकीदी।्ቚ स्तुत्ቚ करणमेंविवप्ቌीसं०-3 जोविकविवप्ቌीसं०-1 की 60 माताहैत�ाजिजसकीउ्቞ व्ቧ! है, ऐसीवृ्ቍ मविहलाअपनेबेटेवबहूके सा�विकसीकेघरमेंघुसकरउसकेसा�मारपीटकरेंयहपूण!तः अस्वाभाविवकहैजबविकआवेविदकात�ाउसकेदोलड़केवएकलड़कीघर मेंही�े।इसकेअलावायहभीउ्ቤेखनीयहैविक्ቚ स्तुत्ቚ करणमेंजो मेधिडकलरिरपोट! दालिखलकीगयीहैउसमेंएकसाधारणचोंटवदोजगह दद! कीभिशकायतबतायीगयीहै।उ्ሹ मेधिडकलरिरपोट! विद०-02-02.2024 कोसमय 12.05 परकरायागयाजिजसमेंयहस्प्ቖ उ्ቤेखहैविकचोटेसात विदनपुरानीहै।घटनासेसातविदनबाददद! कीभिशकायतकेसंदभ! में डॉक्टरकारायदेनाविकवसातविदनपहलेकीचोटकादद! हैस्वयंमें दशा!ताहैविकमेधिडकलरिरपोट! विव्ቫसनीयनहींहैउसपरविव्ቫासविकयेजाने काकोईआधारनहींहै।आवेविदकानेघटनाविद०-26.01.2024 कीदቕኌशत करतेहुएविद०-05.03.2024 कोयह्ቚ ा�!नाप्ቔ एकलंबेअंतरालकेबाद स्तुतविकया।विद०-29.01.2024 कोपुलिलसअधी्ቌकवजिजलामजिजस्ट्रेट को्ቚ ा�!नाप्ቔ विदयागया।उपरो्ሹ तथ्ययहदशा!तेहैविकप्ቌकारोंके ारा मध्यमामूलीविववादहुआ�ा।उ्ሹ विववादकेसम्बन्धमेंगांववालों्ቛ शांधितव्यवस्�ाहेतुतहरीरलिलखीगईजिजसमेंयहस्प्ቖ उ्ቤेखविकयागयाहै विकदोनोंप्ቌ केब्ሴोंकेमध्यमा्ቔ कहासुनीहुई�ीऔरगांववालोंकी तहरीरमेंयहभीस्प्ቖ उ्ቤेखहैविकआवेविदकावउसकेपु्ቔीनेयहकहा �ाविकवहझूठेमुकदमेंमेंफंसादेगी, जिजसकेसंदभ! मेंयह्ቚ ा�!नाप्ቔ विदयागयाहैजोस्वयंमेंदशा!ताहैविकआवेविदकानेब्ሴोंकेमामूलीविववाद कोतूलदेनेकेलिलएवविवप्ቌीगणपरअनुधिचतदबावबनानेकेउ्ቌेश्यसे एवंविवप्ቌीगणकोपरेशानकरनेकेविनयतसेत�ाअनुधिचतलाभ्ቚ ा्቎ करने केउ्ቌेश्यसेमनगढंततथ्योंपरयह्ቚ ा�!नाप्ቔ विदयागयाहैजिजसपर विकसीभी्ቚ कारकीकाय!वाहीविकयाजानान्यायोधिचतनहींहोगा।

¶20

रमेशचन वैश्यबनामस्टेटआफउ्ቈर्ቚ देशवअन्य 2023 सु्ቚीम (एस०सी०) 550. एवंअन्यविवधिधव्यवस्�ाविहतेशवमा! बनामस्टेटआफ 2020 उ्ቈराखण्डएवंअन्यए०आई०आर सु्ቚीमकोट! 5584.

¶21

उ्ሹ विवधिध-व्यवस्�ाओंमेंमाननीयउ्ሴ न्यायालय्ቛ ाराएस०सी/एस०टी० के्ቚ ावधानोंकेतहतस्प्ቖ विदशाविनदgशजारीविकएहैं।

¶22

4

¶23

माननीयउ्ሴतमन्यायालय्ቛ ारावि्ቚयंका्ቦ ीवास्तवबनामस्टेटआफउ्ቈर देश (2015)6 एस०सी०सी० 287 मेंविनणiतविकयागयाहै।धारा 156(3) दं०्ቚ०सं०कीशवि्ሹयोंका्ቚ योगकरतेसमयन्यायालयकोसावधानरहना चाविहए।औरयहध्यानरखनाचाविहएविकउसकादुरूपयोगनविकयाजा सकेऔरन्याधियकमቜኌस्तष्कका्ቚ योगकरकेआदेशपारिरतकरनाचाविहए। मा्ቔ मशीनीस्तरपरतकनीकीआधारपरआदेशपारिरतनहींकरनाचाविहए और दुरूपयोग की संभावना को ध्यान में रखते विवधिधनुसार न्याधियक मቜኌस्तष्कका्ቚ योगकरकेआदेशपारिरतकरनाचाविहए। 156(3) अतःउ्ሹ तथ्योंमेंविवधिधव्यवस्�ाओंकेआलोकमें्ቚ ा�!नाप्ቔ द०्ቚ०सं०विनरस्तविकएजानेयोग्यहैं।

¶24

आदेश

¶25

स्तुत्ቚ कीण! फौजदारीवादसं०- 93/2024 विनरस्तविकयाजाताहै। प्ቔावलीदालिखलदफ्तरहो। "

¶26

Impeaching the order dated 05.04.2024, it is stated that trial court committed error in law and fact both on solely relying upon the police report in rejecting the application preferred under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. in view of the facts and evidence in support thereof placed before the trial court. In this regard reference has been made to the contents of application preferred under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., Annexure No. 1 and medical report annexed as Annexure No. 2 to the present appeal.

¶27

Learned A.G.A., opposing the present appeal submitted that in the facts of the case particularly the observation made by the trial court in the order impugned dated 05.04.2024 no interference is required and the appeal is liable to be dismissed at admission stage.

¶28

Considered the submissions of learned Counsel for the parties and perused the records.

¶29

Upon due consideration, this Court finds that the allegations made in the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. are concocted and false. It is for the reason that as per appellant, total four persons were assaulted with kicks and fists and lathi/danda by

¶30

5

¶31

three persons and only she (Sateera wife of Holi Dhobi) was examined on 02.02.2024 by medical officer i.e. after about 7 days of the alleged incident and as per the medical report of the injuries are simple and more than seven years old and the doctor concerned, in regard to the injuries, stated that no opinion be given and in this view of the matter the appellant failed to prove the basic story narrated in the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. Further, to the view of this Court, injuries were sustained in some other incident and taking note of the benefit of the injuries opined by the doctor concerned, the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved just to create pressure on the side opposite and to get the financial benefits from State exchequer after preferring an application on 29.01.2024 making allegations to attract offence indicated under Section SC/ST Act as also IPC .

¶32

For the reasons aforesaid, this Court finds no force in the present appeal. It is accordingly dismissed . Cost made easy. Order Date :- 09.05.2024 Jyoti/-

¶33

Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sateera v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sateera v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pawan Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Dileep Singh Son of Ram Gopal Singh (Second Bail) Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Home

Ameen Ali and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Smt. Geeta vs State of U.P. through Prin. Secy., Home Department Civil Secretariat, Lucknow and others

Mosim Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow and Another

Nagendra Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another