Disposed

Subhash and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC8 Feb 2024CRLA/385/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An appeal against an order setting aside summons under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in a case under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and SC/ST Act. The court noted the absence of documentary evidence and medical report by the complainant, issued notice, and adjourned the matter.

What did the court decide?

Notice issued to complainant and case adjourned to April 2024; no coercive action against appellants till next hearing.

Subhash and Another vs State of U.P… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 385 of 2024 Appellant :- Subhash And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Shiv Sharan Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶5

The present appeal has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 11.06.2019 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Bahraich in Complaint Case No.163/2018 under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3(1)(x) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Ranipur, District- Bahraich.

¶6

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants are running a school and complainant of the present case was appointed as a watchman in the aforesaid school but due to his misconduct, he was ousted, thereafter, he started making pressure for re-appointment and when the appellants denied then on the basis of incorrect facts, complaint case in question was lodged with the allegation that complainant was appointed by the appellants in lieu of salary of Rs.6,000/- per month but only Rs.3,000/- were being paid to him.

¶7

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that as per the complainant, about Rs.5,40,000/- was due on him but when he raised demand then he was told that rest of the amount would be paid to him later on, thereafter on 27.06.2018, at about 7 p.m., complainant was beaten by the appellants. He further submitted that no any medico-legal report was placed by the complainant before the trial court and in the statement recorded under section 200 Cr.P.C., he has stated that he does not have any documentary evidence related to his appointment and salary amounting Rs.6,000/- per month but trial court failed to consider all these facts and passed summoning order in the most mechanical manner, therefore, kind indulgence of this Court is necessary.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of appellants but he does not dispute this fact that complainant himself has admitted that he has no documentary evidence related to his appointment or salary of Rs.6,000/- per month. He also conceded this fact that no any medico-legal report was placed by the complainant

¶9

before the trial court.

¶10

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of appeal, impugned order, statement of complainant, as well as other relevant documents; it is evident that complainant himself has admitted in his statement that on 27.06.2018, at about 7 p.m., he was beaten by the appellants but no medico-legal report was placed by him, as no documentary evidence related to the appointment and salary of Rs.6,000/- per month has been provided by the complainant, therefore, matter requires consideration.

¶11

Issue notice to the complainant/respondent no.2 returnable at an early date.

¶12

List this case in the month of April, 2024.

¶13

No coercive action shall be taken against the appellants till the next date of listing.

¶14

Order Date :- 8.2.2024 V. Sinha

¶15

Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Subhash and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhash and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajay Kumar Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Subhash Soni vs State of U.P Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Rahul Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 3 Others

Arshad Jameel vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Ravi vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Pradeep Kumar Yadav and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another