Rampal Sharma And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 8475 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Rampal Sharma And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 2 April, 2025

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:45196
 
Court No. - 73
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2080 of 2025
 

 
Applicant :- Rampal Sharma And Another
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Prakash
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Sunil Vashisth,G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
 

1. Heard Sri Shiv Prakash Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Sudhir Kumar Chandraul, learned AGA for the State and Sri Sunil Vashisth for opposite party no. 2.

2. A joint statement has been made by learned counsel for the parties that they do not propose to file any additional affidavit and the application be decided on the basis of the documents available on record. With the consent of the parties, the application be decided at the fresh stage.

3. This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 11 of 2024 (Smt. Geeta Vs. Rampal Sharma and others) pending in the Court of Additional District & Session Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hapur, under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC & Section 3(2)(vKa), 3(1)(D), 3(1) (Dh), SC/ST Act, P.S. Pilkhuwa, District Hapur and summoning order dated 05.09.2024 passed by learned Additional District & Session Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hapur.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants has argued that a complaint stood lodged by the opposite party no. 2 on 07.02.2024 against the applicants and one other purported to be under Section 323, 504, 506, 354, 354B, 307 & 34 IPC read with Section 3(1)(da)(gha) and 3(2)v Ka SC/ST Act and Section 4, 22, 23 and 3A of the POCSO Act with an allegation that the opposite party no. 2 belongs to SC Category and the applicants herein are the owners of a clinic, medical store and pathology who are indulging in illegal pathological activities. As per the complaint about 5-6 months prior to the lodging of the complaints the police officials of Haryana have raided the establishment of the applicants, however, due to the applicants' pressure, no action was taken. Harbouring an impression that the opposite party no. 2 was instrumental in lodging police complaint pursuant whereto raid was conducted, enmity stood stemmed in the mind of the applicants and on 26.01.2024 at about 4:30 P.M. when the the opposite party no. 2 was sitting with her jethani in a public place (road) then the applicants therein barged and hurled caste based abuses. When the same was resisted then they started uttering caste based abuses and hearing the loud noises, her husband Sonu and nephew Hemant came out from the house and when they tried to pacify the applicants then the applicants with the help of their legs gave a blow to the nephew and he fell down and the applicant no. 1 with the intention to kill the husband of the opposite party no. 2, Sonu took a bottle in his hand and tried to hit on the head of her husband. The information about the said incident was stated to have been given to the police in the registered no. 112, however, on 27.01.2024, the husband of the opposite party no. 2, Sonu and the nephew, Hemant were challaned in the proceedings under Section 151 Cr.P.C. and they were released on next day thereafter, the opposite party no. 2 with the help of the police tried to get the medical examination done but the same was not done and on 05.02.2024 complaint was made to the SSP and SC/ST Commission for lodging of the first information report.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case and they are innocent. Submission is that with respect to an incident dated 26.01.2024 at 4:30 P.M., the wife of the applicant no. 2 namely, Smt. Neetu Sharma lodged a complaint against 4-5 males and 1-2 females before the Police Station Pilkhuwa being no. 0035 on 27.01.2024 at 15:36 hours under Section 147, 323, 504, 506, 452, 307, 395 IPC relatable to the commission of the offences on 26.01.2024 wherein the unnamed assailants had entered into the establishment of the applicants and thereafter, not only stole the items but also administered beating which stood recorded in CCTV camera. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant nos. 1 and 2 sustained grievous injuries. He further submits that a charge sheet stood filed against the husband of the opposite party no. 2 being Shikandar @ Sonu on 27/28.02.2024 under Sections 452, 323, 325, 506 IPC and just as a matter of counter blast, the complaint lodged on 07.02.2024 against the applicants relatable to the commission of the offences on 26.01.2024.

6. Submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the entire allegations sought to be levelled are not only false and concocted story but an attempt to victimize and to misuse the process of law. Argument is that though in the complaint itself, it has been recited that the complainant's husband, Sonu and nephew, Hemant had sustained injuries but there is nothing on record to substantiate that the injuries were sustained as a matter of fact a glance of counter affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 would clearly demonstrate that Annexure-2 at page 18 shows the medical certificate dated 04.02.2024 of traumatic injury in forehead but the same is of Bsc BAMS and further while inviting attention towards page 19 report is again shown of dated 28.01.2024 of a doctor who is Bsc BAMS report.

7. Contention is that had the injuries so sustained then the husband and the nephew of the opposite party no. 2 would have been put to medical examination by an allopathic/orthopedic doctor. He further submits that there has been delay in lodging of the complaint as the incident is dated 26.01.2024 but the complaint has been lodged on 07.02.2024. As regards the hurling of caste based abuses in public is concerned, the submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the same is patently false as no such utterance has been made. He seeks to rely upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hitesh Verma Vs. State of Uttarakhand 2020 (10) SCC 710 so as to contend that an offence is not necessarily to be established merely on the fact that the informant was a member scheduled caste unless there is an intention to humiliate a member of SC/ST for the reason that the victim belongs to the said caste. Reliance has also been placed upon decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Iqbal and others vs. State of U.P. AIR 2023 SCC 3731 so as to contend that it is not enough for the Court to look into the averments made in the FIR/complaint alone for the purposes of ascertaining whether necessary ingredients to construe the alleged offence are disclosed or not. In frivolous or fictitious proceedings the Court owes a duty to look into many other attending circumstances emerging from the record of the case over and above the averments and, thus, it is argued that mens rea is not proved from the version in the complaint or the statement of the witness. Thus, it is prayed that the entire proceedings including summoning be quashed.

8. Countering the submission so made by the learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Sunil Vashisth who appears for the opposite party no. 2 has submitted that this Court may not come in the rescue of the applicants in the proceedings for the simple reason that offences are made out from the narration of the allegations contained in the complaint. He submits that there already happens to be recitals in the complaint containing an allegation that caste based abuses were heard in public view i.e. on the road and further the statements under Section 200 and 202 of the Cr.P.C. of the prosecution side also corroborates the prosecution theory. Injuries were also sustained by the husband and the nephew of the complainant but it was on account of total non-cooperation on the part of the police, the medical examination was not done and the applicants got the medical examination done from the private practitioner. He further submits that once it is come on record that on 26.01.2024 there happens to be an incident wherein both the factions are alleging to have sustained injuries then the incident cannot be ruled out and further there has been no delay in lodging the complaint particularly when the opposite party right from the very inception had been making efforts for getting the complaint/FIR lodged but on account of apathy and reluctance of the police the applicants were construing to approach the concerned SSP and the SC/ST Commission and then finally file complaint under Section 156(3). He submits that the summoning order cannot be faulted and the application is liable to be rejected.

9. Sri Sudhir Kumar Chandraul, learned AGA has supported the arguments of the learned counsel for the applicants, the order impugned is perfectly valid in accordance with law and no fault can be attributed in this regard.

10. Having heard the submissions made across the bar, the sole question which arises is the extent of judicial intervention in the facts and circumstances of the case. As a matter of fact the parties have raised contentions regarding their innocence and false implication by the others and looking into the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present application while granting liberty to the applicants to prefer a discharge application before the Court of Additional District and Session Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST, Hapur within a period of 45 days from today and on the filing of the discharge application, the court below is directed to decide the same within a further period of 45 days. Till the disposal of the discharge application, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in pursuance of Complaint Case No. 11 of 2024 (Smt. Geeta Vs. Rampal Sharma and others) pending in the Court of Additional District & Session Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hapur, under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC & Section 3(2)(vKa), 3(1)(D), 3(1) (Dh), SC/ST Act, P.S. Pilkhuwa, District Hapur and summoning order dated 05.09.2024 passed by learned Additional District & Session Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hapur. Since the order has been passed in the presence of the counsel who are representing the parties, thus, it would be deemed that they have full knowledge about the order passed today. The protection so accorded by this Court shall stand vacated, in case, the applicants do not stick to the timeline and violate any of the conditions.

11. Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 2.4.2025

Rajesh