Back
CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Sateyendra Prasad Yadav, son of Sri Dev Lal Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard learned counsel for the appellant(s) in both the criminal appeals and Mr. Sadanand Paswan, learned Special P.P. for the State duly assisted by Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant.
2. Both these appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment as it took its shape from the same impugned judgment.
3. Both these appeals are being preferred for quashing the impugned order dated 16.03.2020 passed by learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya in connection with S.C. & S.T. P.S. Case No. 45/2019, whereby and whereunder learned court, after differing with the charge-sheet submitted by the police vide charge-sheet No. 01/2020, pleased to take cognizance against the appellant(s) namely, Satyendra Prasad Yadav and Dr. Nisha Peshin for the offence under Section 354, 354(D)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(r)(s)(h)(j)(w)(ii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to as the “SC/ST Act”) and ordered for issuance of summon, pending in the court of learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya.
4. Brief facts of the prosecution case is that one Sita Devi filed a complaint petition on
The court ruled that allegations under the SC/ST Act must not be based on malafide intentions, emphasizing the need to prevent misuse of protective legislation.
The appeal's outcome highlighted the necessity for a reasoned order when a trial court differs from an investigator's findings.
Cognizance of offences under specific laws requires a prima facie case, evaluated without delving into merits or defence arguments, and sufficient evidence can maintain charges.
Misuse of SC/ST Act leading to quashing of cognizance order due to lack of credible evidence.
Cognizance under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is valid based on prima facie evidence, even if contradicted by the Investigating Officer's findings.
The court ruled that allegations under the SC/ST Act and IPC were false and motivated by personal vendetta, emphasizing the need to prevent misuse of legal provisions.
The misuse of the S.C./S.T. Act for personal grievances is impermissible, and allegations must substantiate a prima facie case to avoid abuse of legal processes.
The SC/ST Act should not be invoked for civil disputes, and criminal proceedings must not be misused for personal vendettas.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
