HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Manju Lata And Another .....Appellant(s)

Versus State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s) : Rang Nath Pandey, Santosh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 51 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J.

1. Heard Shri Rang Nath Pandey, learned counsel for the appellants and Shri R.K. Singh, learned AGA for the State. As per office report, notice on the respondent/informant has been duly served, but none has appeared on behalf of the said respondent to oppose the appeal.

2. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(1) of The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellants with a prayer to allow the appeal and set aside the order dated 30.04.2024 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sonbhadra in Warrant and Summon Cases No. 171/2023 (Rajkumari Vs. Manju Lata Pandey and others) arising out of Application under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. in Case Crime No. 215/2022 in Final Report No. 225/2023, under Sections 342, 294, 354, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C and

3(2)(v-a) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Chopan, District-Sonbhadra.

3. Factual matrix of the case is that an FIR was lodged by victim/informant against the present appellants in Case Crime No. 215 of 2022 under Sections 356, 342, 294, 354, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C and 3(2)(v-a) and 3(1)Dha) of SC/ST Act. Matter was investigated and police submitted a final report. Aggrieved by the said final report, victim filed a protest petition. Said protest petition was allowed by the learned trial court and it converted the protest petition into complaint case. Statement of victim was recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. Apart from that, statements of five other witnesses of victim were also recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C. The learned trial court, after examining the statements of victim and other witnesses, found sufficient ground to proceed against the appellants and, accordingly, vide order dated 30.4.2024, has summoned them to face trial. Aggrieved by the said summoning order, this criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellants.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that allegations in the first information report, prima facie, appear to be exaggerated, concocted and fabricated. The matter was thoroughly investigated by the Investigating Officer and he found that allegations were false and, accordingly, he filed a final report. However, the final report submitted by the Investigating Officer was converted into a complaint. The statements of victim and other witnesses are riddled with contradictions and, prima facie, appear to be embellished and exaggerated. Victim has alleged that appellants, who were unknown to her, proposed her to engage her for professional devotional/spiritual singing and, thereafter, took victim alongwith other ladies companions of the victim in a car to their house, where the alleged incident of rape was committed. She has also alleged that appellant no.1, who happens to be a lady, was also accompanied appellant no.2 at the time of alleged incident which, prima facie, establishes falsehood of the allegations. Hence, the impugned cognizance/summoning order passed by the learned trial court suffers from illegality and is liable to be set aside.

5. Learned AGA has submitted that statements of victim and other five witnesses establish a prima facie case against the appellants. They are consistently stated that victim and other ladies, who were companions of victim, were subjected to sexual assault by the appellants. Hence, the impugned order summoning the appellant does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality and this criminal appeal is liable to be dismissed.

6. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record including the statements of victim and other witnesses.

7. It is evident from perusal of impugned order that learned trial court has not even made a brief discussion of the