The offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, is not established merely on the fact that the informant is a member of Scheduled Caste unless there is an intention to humiliate a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe for the reason that the victim belongs to such caste.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Shri Tushar Bhushan, learned counsel for the appellants as well as Sri Santosh Kumar Kanaujia, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 3 and Shri Ashok Kumar Srivastava, learned AGA for the State and perused the entire record.

2. Learned A.G.A. has already filed the counter affidavit. In reply thereto learned counsel for the appellant has filed the rejoinder affidavit. Vide order dated 19.7.2023 learned counsel for the opposite party No.3 was granted three weeks time to file counter affidavit, but till today no counter affidavit has been filed.

3. Learned counsel for the opposite party No.3 submits that he will argue the matter without counter affidavit.

4. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellants, Ashwnee Kumar and Avinash Bhatt with a prayer to quash the impugned summoning order dated 11.04.2019 as well as the impugned consequential summoning order dated 08.12.2022 of Case Crime No.1613 of 2017, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(X) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station Kotwali Sadar, District Lakhimpur Kheri pending before the learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act (A.D.J.-II), Lakhimpur Kheri.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the respondent No.3 has lodged the first information report by making false and baseless allegations. And the allegations levelled against the appellants are made with malafide intention due to village party bandi. No such incident took place, as alleged by the prosecution.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that there were certain substitutions made in the the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 on 26-01-2016 and the present F.I.R. was lodged in section 3(1)(x) of the S.C./ S.T. Act 1989 under the wrong pretext ignoring the substitution made on 26-01-2016.

7. Learned Counsel for the appellants places reliance upon the said substitution in section 3(1)(x) of the S.C./ S.T. Act 1989 which is reproduced below:-

Section 3. Punishments for offences atrocities. (1) Whoever, not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe,--

(x) corrupts or fouls the water of any spring, reservoir or any other source ordinarily used by members of the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes so as to render it less fit for the purpose for which it is ordinarily used;

8. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that looking into the allegations made by the complainant, upon which the F.I.R. was registered on 23-11-2017 does not prima facie disclose any act of the appellants under section 3(1)(x) of the S.C./ S.T. Act in as much as the alleged act of the appellants as narrated in the contents of the FIR at best disclose the commission of offence under section 3(1)(r) of the S.C/ S.T. Act, 1989. And once the FIR was registered under the wrong section then it was incumbent upon the police officials to rectify the same and file the charge sheet under correct Sections. section 3(1)(r) of the S.C./ S.T. Act 1989 which is reproduced below:-

Section 3. Punishments for offences atrocities. (1) Whoever, not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe,--

(r) intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in any place within public view;

9. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the appellants have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the appellants that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It has also been pointed out that the accused are not having any criminal histor