The court established that for an offence under the SC/ST Act to apply, there must be intent to humiliate a member of the community in a public context, supported by evidence.

JUDGMENT

Shamim Ahmed, J.

This Court vide order dated 25-08-2023 granted ten days and no more as an last opportunity to opposite party no. 2 for filing counter affidavit. Today when the case is being taken up in revised list then neither counsel for the opposite party no.-2 is present nor any counter affidavit has been filed on his behalf. As such this court is proceedings finally in the interest of Justice.

2. Heard Shri Kaushal Kishore Tewari, learned counsel for the appellants and Shri Ashok Kumar Srivastava, learned AGA for the State and perused the entire record.

3. This criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellants Ravi Prakash @ Suraj and Rajesh Kumar @ Tori under Section 14-A (1) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'SC/ST Act') for quashing the summoning order dated 05-09-2022, passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sitapur in Complaint Case No. 47 of 2022 ( Radhey Shyam v. Ravi Prakash @ Suraj & others), under Sections 323 , 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)Da and 3(1) Dha of SC/ST (PA) Act, P.S. Machrehata, District Sitapur as well as the entire proceedings of aforesaid complaint case.

4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellants that the respondent No.2 has lodged the complaint case by making false and baseless allegations. The complaint case has been got lodged by the respondent No.2 by moving an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before Learned Special Judge S.C./ S.T. Act, Sitapur on 07-12-2021 against the appellants and two other persons.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to enmity with the respondent no. 2. The appellants are law abiding citizens and appellant no. 1 is Assistant Manager in an multi national company and on the date of alleged occurrence appellant no. 1 was in Noida. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that respondent no. 2 was extending threats to the appellants for implicating them in false and frivolous cases in order to harass them.

6. Learned Counsel for the appellants had placed reliance on report dated 03-01-2022 submitted by the Circle Officer of P.S. - Machrehata, District Sitapur in which it has been stated by Circle Officer that no such occurrence ever took place and impugned application has been given by the respondent no.2 by making false and bogus allegations against the appellants, the said report dated 03-01-2022 is annexed as Annexure No 2 in the affidavit.

7. 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 history.

8. Learned counsel for the appellants further submitted that the opposite party no.2 moved an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 07-12-2021, which was treated as a complaint case by the l