Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA
Chandrakesh Bhardwaj – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Judgement :
JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Mr. R.P.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Deepak Upadhyaya, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and Mr. Rahul Asthana, learned AGA appearing for the State respondents.
2. The appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 14A(1) of S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 challenging the order dated 23.7.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Meerut in Complaint No. 26 of 2023 ( Smt. Amarwati vs. Chandrakesh Bhardwaj and another ), under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)5 SC/ST Act, Police Station Kankarkheda, District Meerut.
3. The appellant herein Chandrakesh Bhardwaj has been summoned to face trial under Section 204 of Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CrPC’) for the offences under the aforesaid sections. The appellant has preferred this appeal on the grounds that the order impugned passed by the learned trial Court is arbitrary and against the provisions of law and the same is against the weight of evidence. The appellant has also taken the ground that there was no motive on the part of him to commit the alleged offence and there is
The prosecution cannot proceed where allegations reflect a civil dispute and lack evidence of criminal conduct, as per principles from SC/ST Act precedents.
The SC/ST Act should not be invoked for civil disputes, and criminal proceedings must not be misused for personal vendettas.
The court can quash criminal proceedings based on a compromise between the parties, especially in cases where the allegations could not be established and the continuance of the proceedings would be ....
High Court quashed FIR under Section 69 BNS on compromise as offence (sexual intercourse by deceitful promise of marriage, not rape) not heinous; voluntary victim settlement secures justice, prevents....
(1) Offence under SC/ST Act, 1989 can be quashed on the ground of compromise between parties.(2) Powers of Apex Court under Article 142 can be invoked to quash a criminal proceeding on the basis of a....
The court ruled that allegations under the SC/ST Act must demonstrate intent to humiliate based on caste, and the second proviso of Section 14-A(3) was struck down as unconstitutional.
The court has discretionary power under Section 482 of the CrPC to quash proceedings, and it must consider the nature of the offences, the possibility of conviction, and the parties' settlement.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
