SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(Pat) 687

NAGENDRA RAI, G.S.CHAUBE
Haresh Kumar Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


Judgment

Nagendra Rai, J.

1. In these twenty-two applications, the petitioners have challenged the vires of the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and have prayed for quashing their prosecutions under the aforesaid Act.

2. As the common questions of law are involved in all the cases they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

3. The allegations against the petitioners in all the cases are that they have committed offence under the Act and in some cases they are also alleged to have committed offences under the Penal Code. It is not necessary to state the facts of all of the cases as the submissions advanced by the counsels for the petitioners in all the cases are with regard to vires of the Act on different grounds which require no reference to the factual matters. In some case, the learned Counsels referred to the facts of the cases to show that even if the allegations are accepted on their face value no case under the said Act or IPC is made and in that view of matter the facts of those cases will be referred to while dealing with the said submission.


















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top