The court upheld that a prima facie case is sufficient for cognizance under the SC/ST Act, emphasizing that detailed evidence analysis is not required at this stage.

JUDGMENT :

Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J.

1. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (1) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (in short 'the SC/ST Act') has been preferred by the appellant - Kaushal with the prayer to set-aside the cognizance/summoning order dated 2.12.2023 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Moradabad, the charge sheet and the entire proceedings of Special Session Trial No. 1771 of 2023, arising out of case crime no. 482 of 2023, under Sections 342 , 504, 506 , 323 IPC and 3(1)(da), 3(1) (dha), 3(2)(5 ka) the SC/ST Act, P.S. Civil Lines, District Moradabad.

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.

3. Prosecution case, as culled out from the record, is that an altercation took place between the named accused persons including the present appellant and the informant side at a coaching centre. It is alleged that after closing of the coaching when the informant was returning to his home in day time, the present appellant alongwith his associates hurled abuses with caste related remarks and threatened him for dire consequences and he was also beaten with kicking and fisting and his money was also robbed by the accused persons. Some independent persons of the same vicinity reached there and the accused persons fled away, however, police did not take proper action and the present appellant was simply challaned under Section 151 CrPC whereas the incident was captured in the CCTV footage. However, subsequently F.I.R. was lodged and after investigation charge sheet under Sections 342 , 504, 506 , 323 IPC and 3(1)(da), 3(1) (dha), 3(2)(5 ka) of SC/ST Act was filed and cognizance was taken by the Court of the said offences and the accused persons were summoned to face trial accordingly.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Admittedly, a fracas took place between two groups of students but it is totally false to say that on account of said heated argument any assault was made by the appellant alongwith his associates upon the informant. The eye witnesses have not supported the prosecution case. No serious injuries have been caused to the informant/injured of this case. In the x-ray performed by the doctor no adversity has been discovered. Appellant has no criminal history to his credit. It is further submitted that offence under SC/ST Act is also not made out against the present appellant.

5. The next argument advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the I.O. of this case collected absolutely no evidence to the effect that the incident took place in any place within the public view and intentional insult or intimidation was made by the appellant. It is further submitted that there is not even an iota of evidence on record as collected by the I.O. that the appellant committed the alleged offence for the simple reason of the injured being a member of SC/ST community. It is also submitted that the appellant never hurled abuses to insult him by caste related remarks nor threatened for life and no independent witness came forward to support the prosecution version in this respect. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court.

6. Per contra, the learned AGA opposed the appeal and submitted that since the appellant and the injured were studying in the same coa