Allahabad High Court
Rajesh Kumar Ram vs State Of U.P. And 17 Others on 13 December, 2023
Author: Subhash Chandra Sharma
Bench: Subhash Chandra Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:236598
Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 20199 of 2013
Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Ram
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 17 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Gopal Krishna Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate,Ram Jatan Yadav
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned learned A.G.A. for State and perused the record.
2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner with following prayers:
"a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing set-aside the impugned judgment and order dated 10.09.2013 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, Ballia in Criminal Revision No. 236 of 2012 (Rajesh Kumar Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others), whereby dismissed the revision of the petitioner and judgment and order dated 22.10.2012 issued by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 1st, Ballia in Criminal Complaint Case No. 37 of 2011.
b) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 1st, Ballia to summon the respondent Nos. 2 to 9 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 452 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)X of S.C./S.T. Act and also summon the respondent nos. 10 to 18 under additional section i.e. Section 3(1)X of S.C./S.T. Act including Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 452 I.P.C., P.S. Bhimapura, District- Ballia."
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in this case an FIR was lodged as Crime No. 179 of 2009 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 452, 504, 506 and 3(1)X S.C./S.T. Act in which after investigation final report was submitted by the Police. A protest petition was filed by the petitioner before the learned Court concerned which was treated as complaint and after recording statement of the complainant under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and other witnesses under Section 202 Cr.P.C. summoning order was passed on 22.10.2012 but no summoning was made under Section 3(1)X S.C./S.T Act though, there was sufficient material on record to summon them under the aforesaid sections also. The statements of the complainant as well as other witnesses also show the commission of offence under Section 3(1)X S.C./S.T. Act against the respondents, but this fact was not taken into consideration by the learned court concerned and wrongfully it was held that incident took place within the house of the complainant, therefore, provisions under Section 3(1)X cannot be applied.
4. It is also submitted that initially incident took place outside the house of the complainant where words relating to his caste were used by the respondents to insult him intentionally at public place, but this fact was not considered by the learned court and only on the basis of subsequent events which happened inside the house of the complainant, order was passed. This fact was raised by the complainant even before the learned revisional court, but it was also decided by ignoring the aforesaid fact vide order dated 10.09.2013. Therefore, request to direct the learned court to pass summoning order under Section 3(1)X S.C./S.T. Act also with other relevant sections in which summoning was made.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent as well as learned AGA opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case, learned court concerned passed the order on the basis of material on record which cannot be said to be unlawful or inappropriate. It is also contended that case is being proceeded as complaint case in which the statement of witnesses is to be recorded under Section 244 Cr.P.C. and then charge is to be framed under Section 246 Cr.P.C. If the Court will get material at that stage, it may, either after framing the charge in aforesaid sections or without framing charge, refer the matter to the court of sessions for trial, but at this stage, there is no any ground to direct the learned court to add the aforesaid Sections.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by learned counsel for both the parties as well as learned AGA and upon perusal of record and the orders passed by learned Magistrate as well as learned appellate court, it appears that in this case, the summoning order was made in the year 2012 and revisional court also decided the revision in the year 2013, since then, trial is going on, therefore, it will be expedient to direct the learned court concerned to frame the charge against the respondents on the basis of material on record while taking in view the provisions as contained under Section 3(1)X S.C./S.T. Act, if charge has not been framed till now. In case, charge has already been framed, it may be altered at subsequent stage before the judgment if there is sufficient material on record constituting of commission of such offence.
7. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 13.12.2023
Anjali
