Recently, the Allahabad High Court has dismissed an appeal seeking withdrawal of prosecution in a case registered under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, holding that courts are not bound by the State’s mere intention to drop charges. It reinforces that cases under special protective statutes cannot be softened or sidelined through executive signals alone and must always pass the test of independent judicial scrutiny.
The case stemmed from a criminal case where the complainant alleged that she had paid Rs 80,000 to one of the accused to arrange a visa and overseas employment for her husband in Qatar. According to the prosecution, a visa handed over in early 2019 turned out to be unusable, and the money was never returned despite repeated demands and even a panchayat intervention.
Matters escalated in May 2020 when the complainant claimed she was subjected to caste-based abuses and threats while seeking a refund. Following the investigation, the police filed a chargesheet for cheating, criminal breach of trust, intimidation, and offences under the SC/ST Act. While the trial was pending, the public prosecutor moved an application to withdraw the case, citing a communication from the State government stating that continuation of prosecution was unnecessary, an application the trial court refused, prompting the appeal.
Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav emphasised that withdrawal of prosecution is not a mechanical exercise and cannot rest solely on the State’s say-so. The Court noted that the trial judge had already examined the FIR, witness statements, and material on record pointing to cheating and caste-linked abuse.
Stressing the statutory safeguards under the SC/ST Act, the Court observed that “a mere expression of intention by the State government for withdrawal of prosecution does not bind the court nor dilute the requirement of independent scrutiny.” Relying on Supreme Court precedent, the Court reiterated that any withdrawal under Section 321 of the CrPC must be driven by the public prosecutor’s independent judgment and must serve public interest, not the accused.
Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the refusal to withdraw prosecution was upheld, with a direction to the trial court to conclude the long-pending trial expeditiously.
Source PTI
Picture Source :
