Uttarakhand High Court
C528/20/2025 on 28 February, 2025
Office Notes, reports,
orders or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions and COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No Registrar's order with
Signatures
28.02.2025 C528 No.20 of 2025
Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. S. K. Shandilya, learned counsel for the
applicants.
2. None is present for the respondent, despite
sufficient service.
3. Heard on the Stay application (IA No.1 of 2025).
4. Present C528 application is filed with the prayer
to quash the summoning order dated 07.09.2024 as well
as the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.13 of
2024, under Sections 324, 504 & 506 IPC and Section
3(1)(10) of SC/ST Act, pending in the court of Sessions
Judge Haridwar.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit
that the summoning order cannot be sustained simply
for the reason that on the complaint there is no
averments that the complainant belongs to Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants would further
submit that in similar nature of case the Hon'ble Apex
Court in "Hitesh Verma Vs. State of Uttarakhand and
Another, reported in (2020) 10 SCC 710, has pondered
upon this issue and observed as under:-
"17. In another judgment reported as Khuman Singh
v. State of M.P., this Court held that in a case for
applicability of Section 3(2)(v) of the Act, the fact
that the deceased belonged to Scheduled Caste
would not be enough to inflict enhanced punishment.
This Court held that there was nothing to suggest
that the offence was committed by the appellant only
because the deceased belonged to Scheduled Caste.
The Court held as under:
"15. As held by the Supreme Court, the offence must
be such so as to attract the offence under Section
3(2)(v) of the Act. The offence must have been
committed against the person on the ground that
such person is a member of Scheduled Caste and
Scheduled Tribe. In the present case, the fact that the
deceased was belonging to "Khangar" Scheduled
Caste is not disputed. There is no evidence to show
that the offence was committed only on the ground
that the victim was a member of the Scheduled Caste
and therefore, the conviction of the appellant-
accused under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act is not sustainable."
18. Therefore, offence under the Act is not
established merely on the fact that the informant is a
member of Scheduled Caste unless there is an
intention to humiliate a member of Scheduled Caste
or Scheduled Tribe for the reason that the victim
belongs to such caste. In the present case, the parties
are litigating over possession of the land. The
allegation of hurling of abuses is against a person
who claims title over the property. If such person
happens to be a Scheduled Caste, the offence
under Section 3(1)(r) of the Act is not made out."
7. Having considered the submission of learned
counsel for the applicant, till the next date of listing, the
entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.13 of 2024,
under Sections 324, 504 & 506 IPC and Section
3(1)(10) of SC/ST Act, pending in the court of Sessions
Judge, Haridwar, shall remain stayed.
8. Stay application stands disposed of.
9. List this matter on 20.05.2025.
(Alok Mahra, J.)
28.02.2025
BS
