Harshit @ Honey VS State of U. P.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

ANIL KUMAR X
Harshit @ Honey – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant: Paritosh Sukla, Shashwat Shukla
For Respondents: G.A., Krishna Kant Dubey, Santosh Kumar Dubey

JUDGMENT

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Santosh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for informant/ respondent and Sri R.K. Singh, learned AGA for State.

2. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(1) of The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellant against the summoning order dated 09.08.2024 passed by Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Gautam Budh Nagar in Complaint Case No. 150 of 2024 (Kamlesh Devi v/s Radha Sharma and others), under sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1) (Da), 3(1) (Dha) S.C./S.T. Act, at Police Station Jewar, District Gautam Budh Nagar pending in the court of Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Gautam Budh Nagar, whereby the court concerned has wrongly summoned the appellant in the present complaint case.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the learned Trial Court has committed gross illegality by converting the protest petition into a complaint without either accepting or rejecting the final report. He further submitted that a thorough and impartial investigation was carried out by the Investigating Officer, who found that the allegations made in the FIR were false and fabricated.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document