Shiv Kumar Jaiswal Alias Shiv Kumar Alias Happu Jaiswal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Instant criminal appeal, under Section 14-A(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, has been preferred against the impugned order dated 02/01/2026 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge / Sessions Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Shrawasti in Special Sessions Trial Number 121 of 2020, State versus Shiv Kumar alias Happu Jaiswal, arising out of Case Crime Number 373 of 2019, under Sections 195, 182 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(ta) of the S.C./S.T. Act, relating to Police Station Kotwali Bhinga, District Shravasti, whereby rejected the discharge application dated 06/12/2021 moved by the appellant.

¶13

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that in the present case, an FIR was lodged by Dadan Singh, S.H.O., Bhinga, Shrawasti on 04/12/2019, against the appellant and co-accused persons under Sections

¶14

CRLA No. 255 of 2026

¶15

2

¶16

195, 182, and 120-B of the I.P.C. vide Case Crime Number 0373 of 2019. In the FIR, there is no allegation regarding the penal provisions of the S.C./S.T. Act, which mentions a previous FIR registered under Case Crime Number 200 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504 and 3(1) (da), 3(1)(dha) of the S.C./S.T. Act, at the instance of Shri Rangi Lal Bhaskar, against co-accused Santosh, Happu, and Rohit. According to the present FIR, the accused persons are trying to retaliate due to the previous FIR against Rangi Lal. Rangi Lal is employee of Beer shop operated by Santosh Jaiswal. Accused persons made false allegations against Rangi Lal of robbery of Rs.1,15,000/-, but subsequently, the said money, which was kept in a bag, was recovered on the pointing out of Sukhraj and another employee of Santosh Jaiswal. An offense under section 3(1)(ta) was added during the investigation, which provides that whoever, not being a member of Schedule Castes or Schedule Tribes, institutes false, malicious, or suspicious criminal or legal proceedings against a member of a Schedule Caste or Schedule Tribe, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall be less than six months and may extend to five years, and a fine.

¶17

He further submitted that in the first charge sheet, the appellant was not included, and it is stated therein that the investigation against Shiv Kumar alias Happu Jaiswal is pending and charge sheet is being filed against Rohit Jaiswal, Santosh Jaiswal, Sukhraj and Anup Pathak. Subsequently, appellant has also been charge-sheeted by way of supplementary charge sheet. He is alleged to have conspired with the co-accused in falsely implication of Rangi Lal. However, there is no allegation against the appellant regarding conspiracy. He has only been implicated in the case due to the fact that he is the brother of Santosh Jaiswal. The complaint

¶18

CRLA No. 255 of 2026

¶19

3

¶20

regarding the robbery of money from Sukhraj against Rangi Lal and two unknown persons was made by Anup Pathak. He also submitted that cognizance of offence under sections 195, 182, and 120B IPC is barred under section 195(1)(a),(b) IPC on the basis of the police report. The case of the appellant is distinguishable from the case of the co-accused. The learned trial court has wrongly dismissed the discharge application filed by the appellant.

¶21

The matter requires consideration.

¶22

Admit.

¶23

Issue notice to the respondent no.2, returnable at an early date through the concerned CJM.

¶24

List on 27/03/2026.

¶25

Counter affidavit, if any, may be filed by the next date of listing.

¶26

Till the next date of listing, no coercive process shall be issued against the appellant, and if any coercive process issued against the appellant, is kept in abeyance.

¶27

(Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.)

¶28

February 6, 2026 KR

¶29

Digitally signed by :- RABINDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shiv Kumar Jaiswal Alias Shiv Kumar Alias Happu Jaiswal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Kumar Jaiswal Alias Shiv Kumar Alias Happu Jaiswal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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

Raj Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Smt. Nilima Gautam and Another vs Girjesh Kumar

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

Ramkaran Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another

Smt. Pushpa Devi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.