Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
SANDEEP SHARMA
Manohar Lal – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenges order framing scst act charges. (Para 1) |
| 2. parties dispute ownership, possession, maintainability. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. revision maintainable against charge framing order. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. scst sections require sc/st land ownership/possession. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. civil judgments deny complainant's ownership/possession. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. ignore civil findings; no scst offence made. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 7. quash charges; misuse for civil dispute. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
Instant criminal revision petition, lays challenge to order dated 12.9.2024, passed by the learned Special Judge, Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh in Session Trial No. 12/24, whereby court below proceeded to frame charge against the petitioners in case FIR No. 97/23 dated 1.7.2023 under Sections 3 (1) (f) and 3 (1) (g) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989 (in short “SCST Act”)
2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioners as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Atharv Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners is that bare perusal of FIR clearly reveals that no case much les
Criminal revision maintainable against charge framing order under SC/ST Act as intermediate; Sections 3(1)(f),(g) inapplicable without Scheduled Caste complainant's proven land ownership/possession, ....
The court ruled that allegations under the SC/ST Act must demonstrate intent to humiliate based on caste, and the second proviso of Section 14-A(3) was struck down as unconstitutional.
Cognizance under the SC/ST Act was quashed as the allegations arose from a land dispute, not atrocities as defined by the Act, while the cognizance for IPC offences was upheld based on prima facie ev....
(1) Offence under SC/ST Act, 1989 can be quashed on the ground of compromise between parties.(2) Powers of Apex Court under Article 142 can be invoked to quash a criminal proceeding on the basis of a....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the principles of abuse of process of law and mala fide intentions in filing a complaint, as outlined in State Haryana Versus Bh....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that allegations must meet the criteria for offenses under the Atrocities Act, and the court must carefully consider the specifics of the complaint....
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
