Advocates:
['DEWENDRA SINGH', '', 'SATYENDRA NARAYAN SINGH', 'G A', '', 'KARUNESH PRATAP SINGH', 'AMIT KUMAR YADAV']

1

Court No. - 88

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8651 of 2022

Appellant :- Ajay And Another

Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Appellant :- Dewendra Singh,Satyendra Narayan Singh

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Amit Kumar Yadav,Karunesh Pratap

Singh

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

1.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the

informant/respondent No. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2.

The present criminal appeal has been preferred against summoning

order dated 01.10.2022, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special

Judge (SC/ST Act), Gorakhpur in S.S.T. No. 09 of 2016 (State of U.P. Vs.

Rama Shankar Gaur & others), arising out of Case Crime No. 210 of 2013

under Sections 419, 420, 406, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)X of SC/

ST Act, P.S. Sahjanwa, District Gorakhpur, whereby the trial court has

summoned the appellants under Section 319 Cr.P.C.

3.

Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that the impugned

summoning order is against the facts and law and thus liable to be set aside.

The first information report of this case was registered on 16.11.2011 by the

informant/respondent No. 2 by moving an application under Section 156(3)

Cr.P.C., wherein inter alia it was alleged that the father of appellants,

namely, Rama Shankar, has shown a land to the informant for sale and

thereafter, she purchased the said land from co-accused Shravan and

Brahmdev by sale-deed executed in favour of the informant and mutation

has also taken place. The allegation made in the first information report is

that the informant has purchased 3 decimal land, whereas on the spot, it was

found only 0.75 decimal. According to the prosecution version, on

05.02.2013 when the informant has gone into the house of the appellants for

compromise, co-accused Rama Shankar and his sons, namely Ajay and Uday

(appellants), have abused her by using caste indicative words and assaulted

her. Learned counsel submitted that at that time, appellants were students

and according prosecution version, the alleged land was shown to the

informant by the father of the appellants and it was purchased by informant

2

from co-accused Shravan and Brahmdev. Appellants have absolutely no role

in the sale of the said land. After investigation, police did not find complicity

of appellants and thus, they were exonerated and charge-sheet was filed

against co-accused persons. It is submitted that during trial, appellants have

been summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C., vide impugned order dated

01.10.2022. It is further submitted that even as per the version of informant,

the alleged incident of abusing and assaulting the informant took place inside

the house of accused-appellants and thus it cannot be said that the incident

took place in public view and, therefore, no offence under Section 3(1)X of

SC/ST Act is made out. It is further submitted that there is absolutely no

material to make out a prima facie case under Sections 419, 420, 406, 323

I.P.C. against the appellants and the allegations regarding Sections 504 and

506 I.P.C. are quite vague. The Trial Court did not consider the matter in

correct perspective and committed error by summoning the appellants and

thus the impugned order is liable to be set aside. In support of his

contention, learned counsel has placed reliance upon the case of Hardeep

Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors., AIR 2014 SC 1400.

4.

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant/respondent No.

2 have opposed the appeal and argued that both the appellants were named in

the first information report but they were exonerated by the police during

investigation, despite being evidence against them. During trial, appellants

have been summoned on the basis of statements of the witnesses recorded

before the trial court and in this connection, learned counsel has referred

statements of PW-1 Kalawati and PW-2 Sandeep. It was submitted that there

is no illegality or perversity