Back
2019 Supreme(All) 943
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Mohd Faiz Alam Khan, J.
Hemant Kumar Mishra And Others - Appellant
Vs.
State Of U.P. And Others - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 2321 of 2018
Decided On : 02-08-2019
Meera Tripathi, Adv., Manish Vaish, Adv.
At the stage of framing of charges, the court is required to evaluate the material and documents on record to determine if there is a prima facie case for proceeding against the accused.
Headnote:
Criminal Appeal - Discharge Application - Sections 323/ 504/ 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(10) SC/ST Act - The court discussed the legal provisions and held that the trial court did not err in rejecting the discharge application. The appeal was dismissed, and the order of the subordinate court was confirmed.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants sought to set aside the order passed by the trial court in a criminal case involving allegations of abuse, assault, and intimidation. The appellants argued that the trial court erred in rejecting their discharge application.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the trial court did not err in rejecting the discharge application, as the material produced by the appellants was not strong enough to discharge them. The court also directed that the appellants' bail applications would be considered if they surrendered before the trial court within 30 days.
Issues: The issues involved the rejection of the discharge application by the trial court and the potential delay in the disposal of bail applications.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the legal principles that at the stage of framing of charges, the court is required to evaluate the material and documents on record to determine if there is a prima facie case for proceeding against the accused. The court also emphasized that the disposal of bail applications is at the discretion of the trial court.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the order of the subordinate court was confirmed. The court directed that the appellants' bail applications would be considered if they surrendered before the trial court within 30 days.
JUDGMENT :
Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants as well as Sri S.N. Tilhari, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
2. This criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellants to set aside the order dated 16.11.2018 passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Balrampur in Complaint Case No. 56/2018 (Banshi Lal Vs. Hemant Kumar Mishra and others) under Section 323/ 504/ 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(10) SC/ST Act, P.S. Kotwali Utraula, District Balrampur and allow the present criminal appeal and discharge the appellants from all offences.
3. Brief facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are that an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved by respondent No.2 namely Banshilal against appellants before C.J.M., Balrampur alleging therein that on 27.05.2014 at about 8:00 P.M., appellants (accused persons) started abusing him in front of his house. Earlier also appellants had assaulted him and a criminal case pertaining to that incident was pending in the Court. The appellants were pressurizing the complainant to compromise in the above mentioned case. On the aforesaid day and time the appellants after entering his house started beating him, addressed him with castiest remarks and threatened him to make compromise in the aforesaid case or to face consequences. On a hue and cry made by him, Ram Abhilakh and Ram Kishore and other persons of the village came at the scene and save him from the appellants. On 28.05.2014 appellant -Hemant Kumar went back to Gorakhpur but rest of the appellants/ accused persons were continuously sitting in front of his house and consequently he could not go to the police station to lodge F.I.R. However, an application was given by him in the police station, Utraulla on 29.05.2014 and subsequently he also approached S.P. balrampur but no action was taken against the appellants.
4. The above mentioned application of the applicant/complainant was treated as complaint and after recording statement of the complainant under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and his witnesses namely Ram Abhilakh and Ram Kishore, the learned Special Judge summoned the appellants to face trial under Section 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(10) SC/ST Act by order dated 21.08.2018. The appellants challenged the summoning order by preferring an Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 6439 of 2018 before this Court and vide order dated 10.10.2018 a Bench of this Court directed the appellants to approach the trial court and to file discharge application. The applicants, in compliance of the said order, filed a discharge application under Section 227 Cr.P.C. which was dismissed vide impugned order dated 16.11.2018. However, by the same order co-accused Abhay Kumar Mishra was discharged.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants while referring to the summoning order and order dated 16.11.2018, whereby the application of the appellants for discharge has been rejected, submits that the trial court has committed grave error in rejecting the application of discharge of the appellants and have passed the order in a cursory manner without taking into consideration the grounds taken by the appellants. It is further submitted that the Chief Judicial Magistrate was not empowered to take cognizance of the matter as the cognizance could only be taken by the Special Judge, SC/ST Act (Special Court), while this case was transferred to the Special Court on 16.05.2018. It is next submitted that the process has also been issued against the appellant without following the provisions as contained under Section 204(3) Cr.P.C. as no list of the witnesses had been filed. It is next submitted that alleged acts as alleged by the complainant will not attract Section 3(1)(10) of the SC/ST Act and in this process learned counsel for the appellants refer to a decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court pronounced on 09.05.2019 in Criminal Appeal No. 875 of 2019 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 9053 of 2016) Birla Corporation
