Dismissed

Nazim v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC23 Aug 2024CRLA/5893/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court dismissed a criminal appeal preferred under Section 14-A(1) of SC/ST Act against the order of the Special Judge Shankar, Hathras. The apex court held that the trial court had sufficient material to take cognizance and summon the appellant amidst the allegations of rape. (Allahabad High Court Criminal Appeal No. - 5893 of 2024)

What did the court decide?

Title of Neutral Citation No. 2024:AHC:155456. Cr. Appeal No. - 5893 of 2024 against the judgment and order dated 22.07.2023 passed by Incharge Special Judge SC/ST Act, Hathras is hereby dismissed. (A

Nazim vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:155456

¶2

Court No. - 83

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5893 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Nazim Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sanjay Kumar Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶7

Despite service of notice, no one appeared on behalf of opposite party no. 2 even in revised call.

¶8

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(1) of SC/ST Act has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 22.07.2023 passed by Incharge Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Hathras in Special Session Trial No. 975 of 2023 (State Vs. Nazim), arising out of Case Crime No.157 of 2023, under Sections 376, 452, 506 IPC, and Section 3(2)(V), 3(1)B(1) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Hathras Kotwali, District Hathras as well as entire proceeding in pursuant to impugned order dated 22.07.2023.

¶9

Learned counsel for appellant submitted that the present FIR was lodged by the victim after making pressure by his family members since she is having affair with the appellant whereas both are living together as husband and wife presently and as such no offence has ever been committed by the appellant as narrated in the F.I.R. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. stated that she knows the appellant since 5 years and also wants to marry with him but without considering the said facts that learned court concerned has taken cognizance vide impugned order illegally against the weight of evidence available on record and as such the same may be quashed.

¶10

Per contra, learned AGA for the State vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the appeal and submitted that after conducting the detailed inquiry, chargesheet has been submitted by the concerned Investigating Officer whereupon considering the material on record, learned trial court taken cognizance and as

¶11

such, there is no illegality in the order impugned.

¶12

After having the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties and perusal of the material available on record, it is apparent from the statement recorded by the victim under section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein, specifically stated that the appellant committed the offence under section 376 IPC upon the victim without her consent. From perusal of the order dated 22.07.2023, it appears that the concerned court perused the charge-sheet, case diary and other materials which had been submitted along with the same and on the basis thereof had held that there was sufficient material to take cognizance and summon the appellant and as such, the Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the order impugned.

¶13

In view thereof, the appeal lacks merit and is hereby dismissed .

¶14

Order Date :- 23.9.2024 Vikram

¶15

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

Nazim v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nazim 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mubarak Ali and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Kishore Chandra Rana and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Raghvendra Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramfal vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Pramod and 3 Others vs State of Up and Another

Pappu and Another vs State of Up Others