Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV
Maloo – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. filing of criminal appeal under sc/st act. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. allegations of land irregularities in fir. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. general allegations with lack of specific evidence. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. improprieties in investigation and implication of the appellant. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. delay in legal action and allegations of mala fide. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 6. absence of specific roles attributed to the appellant. (Para 16) |
| 7. civil nature of dispute and lack of criminal intent. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 8. mechanical invocation of sc/st act and lack of foundation. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 9. absence of supporting evidence or incrimination in fir. (Para 22 , 23) |
| 10. similar cases granting relief to co-accused. (Para 24 , 25) |
| 11. delay in fir and lack of civil proceedings. (Para 26 , 27) |
| 12. guiding precedents against mechanical prosecution. (Para 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 13. fundamental flaws in prosecution justify quashing. (Para 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 14. final ruling to quash cognizance. (Para 34) |
JUDGMENT :
SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.
1. Heard Shree Sageer Ahmad, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr Navnath Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the material available on record
Continuation of criminal proceedings based on vague allegations, especially absent specific acts attributed to the accused, amounts to abuse of process, warranting quashing of charges.
The court held that cognizance for offences under the SC/ST Act cannot be taken without a chargesheet, while maintaining cognizance for IPC offences due to specific allegations.
The court emphasized that allegations under the SC/ST Act require proof of the accused's awareness of the victim's caste, and misuse of the Act for personal vendetta is impermissible.
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.
Cognizance under the SC/ST Act was quashed as the allegations arose from a land dispute, not atrocities as defined by the Act, while the cognizance for IPC offences was upheld based on prima facie ev....
The SC/ST Act should not be invoked for civil disputes, and criminal proceedings must not be misused for personal vendettas.
Cognizance under the SC/ST Act cannot be sustained if the informant is not a member of Scheduled Caste or if the involvement is merely circumstantial related to civil disputes.
The court held that registration of FIR is mandatory when allegations disclose cognizable offences, and any discretion to omit such registration is legally impermissible.
The prosecution cannot proceed where allegations reflect a civil dispute and lack evidence of criminal conduct, as per principles from SC/ST Act precedents.
(1) Nothing has been done which is beyond jurisdiction and competence of the Special Court, SC/ST (POA) Act.(2) Exercise of the inherent powers to quash the proceedings is called for only in case whe....
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
