JUDGMENT

Shamim Ahmed, J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the respondent no.2, learned AGA and perused the material available on record.

2. By means of the present appeal under Section 14A (1) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes ( Prevention of Atrocities ) Act, 1989 the appellants have prayed for quashing the impugned summoning order dated 9.3.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Sitapur in Complaint Case No. 242 of 2019 (Smt. Prema alias Ramguni v. Rakesh Singh and others) under Section 452, 323, 504 and 506 IPC and section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act and the proceedings of the said complaint case.

3. In short, the facts of the case are that Prema @ Ramguni wife of Patiram, resident of village Ram Nagar, Police Station- Ramkot, District Sitapur preferred an application under Section 156(3) CrPC before the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Sitapur alleging therein on 16.08.2019 at about 9 PM the appellants entered into the house of the complainant and started abusing the complainant and her husband and also assaulted her husband. On hearing the noise, the sons and daughters came and rescued. The appellants also abused their sons and used caste aspersions. The appellants also assaulted her sons and and daughter Baby, who was pregnant. When all the family persons started raising alarm, the appellants left the spot. The aforesaid incident was brought to the notice of the police of Police Station-Ramkot but on account of influence of the appellants, the police did not help them. Thereafter, an application about the aforesaid incident was given to the Superintendent of Police, Sitapur Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:5716 through registered post on 26.08.2019 and also met the Superintendent of Police but no action was taken. Under compelling circumstances, the applicants filed the complaint in the court.

4. On the aforesaid complaint, the learned Sessions Judge passed an order dated 25.9.20219 registering the same as a complaint case. After recording of statement under Section 200 CrPC, statement of Patiram and Bebi, the learned court below passed the impugned order dated 9.3.2021 summoning the appellants under the aforementioned sections.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the complaint has been moved with malicious intention as when the appellants came to know that the respondents are destroying their trees by pouring harmful chemical, the appellants have reported the matter to the police. As a counterblast, the present complaint has been filed. It is said that the husband of the respondent no.2 Patiram and his son are working in the Sitapur Judgeship and has lot of influence. It has been stated that when his FIR was not lodged on account of influence of respondents upon the local police, the appellant no.1 has moved an application under Section 156(3) CRPC on 6.11.2019 but the same is still pending on account of pressure tactics of the respondent no.1 and his son.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants has further argued that the ingredients of Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Act are not attracted in the circumstances of the case as the alleged incident has taken place inside the house and not at a place within public view. Further, in view of the decision rendered in Fiona Shrikhande v. State of Maharashtra and another (2013) 14 SCC 44, even offence under other sections are not made out against the appellants.

7. Lastly, it has been argued that the present criminal proceedings have been initiated with an ulterior motive to harass the appellants which is causing serious prejudice as we