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.

JUDGMENT :

ALOK KUMAR PANDEY, J.

1. Heard both sides.

2. The present appeal is directed against the order dated 18.07.2023 passed by the learned court of Special Judge, SC/ST Court, Gaya in Tr. No. 378 of 2023 arising out of Magadh University P.S. Case No. 71 of 2021 registered under Sections 341 , 323, 504/34 of the IPC and Section 3(i)(r)(s) of SC/ST Act whereby and whereunder cognizance for the offences punishable under , 323, 504/34 of the and Section 3(i)(r)(s) / 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act has been taken against the appellant and two others.

3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that respondent no. 2/ informant submitted his written statement before the SHO of Magadh University, Bodh Gaya Police Station stating therein that on 05.06.2021 there was Tilak ceremony of son of Vinod Mistry and Vinod Mistry had given invitation to the informant. It is alleged that informant and his family members reached at the house of Vinod Mistry and sat on the table to have feast. Meanwhile, the appellant while abusing the informant and his family members make them got up from the feast. It is further alleged that when same was protested, the informant and his cousin brother, namely, Niraj was abused and assaulted and after that informant and his cousin brother to save the life fled away from there. It is further alleged that appellant along with co- accused Haridwar Yadav and Mantu Yadav came at the house of cousin brother of informant and abused and assaulted the informant and his family members.

4. On the basis of said written statement, Magadh University P.S. Case No. 71 of 2021 has been registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341 , 323, 504/34 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST Act.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged in the F.I.R. The appellant is personnel of Indian Army and he is not in any way connected with the alleged occurrence as the appellant was posted in Gujarat and for some occasions, he used to visit his native village. He further submits that appellant's family is rival to the winning candidate of Mukhiya and Ward Member and due to said reason, the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to dirty village politics. Learned counsel further submits that there is 5 days delay in lodging the FIR as the alleged occurrence took place on 05.06.2021 and FIR has been lodged on 10.06.2021 and no plausible explanation has been given regarding the said delay. He further submits that there is no eye witness of the alleged occurrence, except the informant and his family members, who are the interested witnesses. Learned counsel further submits that the trial court failed to appreciate that informant has levelled false and bald allegation of abuse but from perusal of the FIR it is clear that no abusive word indicating caste name has been used by the appellant and in the light of the aforesaid facts, no offence is made out against the appellant under the provisions of SC/ST (POA) Act but due to ulterior motive and vested interest, the Investigating Officer submitted charge sheet. Learned counsel further submits that without application of mind, the concerned court accepted the charge sheet in toto and without having any specific material against the appellant passed order dated 18.07.2023 taking cognizance under Sections 341 , 323, 504/34 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s) / 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act against the appellant and others. In the light of aforesaid fact, order passed by the concerned court is not justified and legal and same is fit to be set aside.

6. Learned counsel for the State and learned counse