ORAL ORDER

1. Heard the parties.

2. This appeal has been filed for quashing the order dated12.01.2023 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge 1st-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Kaimur at Bhabhua in I.A. No. 01 of 2022 in S.C./S.T. Trial Case No. 142 of 2018 arising out of Bhagwanpur P.S. Case No. 145 of 2018 dated 11.08.2018 registered under Section 147 / 148 / 149 / 341 / 323 / 307 / 435 of the I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(r)(s) SC / ST Act by which discharge petition of the appellants has been rejected.

3. The prosecution case as per the First Information Report is that on 11.08.2018 at about 11:30 A.M. while the informant along with others was engaged in cleaning paddy crops in their agricultural land, in the meantime, the appellants along with ten other co-accused persons arrived there on a tractor out of which six unknown accused persons who were standing at some distance and armed with weapons started abusing the informant and others by taking their caste name and threatened them with dire consequences if they did not vacate the land. It is alleged that the accused persons started assaulting the informant and other persons present there due to which they sustained injuries. It has further been alleged that three huts which had been constructed for cooking food and for temporary residence during cutting of paddy crops were set on fire by the accused persons due to which all the articles kept therein were completely burnt.

4. The present case was instituted against 14 accused persons but after investigation charge sheet was submitted only against 10 accused persons under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307, 435 I.P.C. and under Section 3 (1) (r) (s), 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act. Thereafter, learned Special Judge differing with the final report took cognizance under the same Sections against all 14 accused persons named in F.I.R. on 12.06.2020.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that upon bare perusal of the First Information Report it would appear that there are only general and omnibus allegations of assault against the accused persons. The specific allegation of abusing the informant and his companions by taking caste name and threatening to kill them has been attributed to unknown persons. It is further submitted that no offence under the provisions of the SC/ST Act is made out against the appellants as the alleged occurrence appears to have taken place on account of an old land dispute between the parties. Learned counsel next submits that the injuries sustained by the informant’s side are simple in nature. It is also contended that Police while submitting police report / charge sheet exonerated the appellants, however, the learned Special Judge took cognizance against all the accused persons.

6. Learned counsel next submits that the appellants have been falsely implicated in the present case by the informant due to village politics. He further submits that the entire prosecution considering the aforesaid submission may be quashed.

7. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the application of the appellants and has submitted that learned Special Judge after going through the materials available on record found prima facie case against the appellants and there is no illegality in rejection of discharge petition.

8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials on record including the impugned order.

9. From the impugned order it appears that the learned Special Judge has taken note of the legal provisions that at the time of deciding discharge petition filed by the accused the court has to weigh the evidence for limited purpose to find out whether or not a prima facie case against the accused is made out. Guilt or innocence of the accused is not determined at the time of framing of charge. Only existence of prima facie case is enough. Charges can be framed on the basis of strong suspicion also. The Court has taken note of the statement of witnesses recorded during the cou