1

A.F.R.

Reserved on: 09.09.2021

Delivered on: 02.03.2022

Court No. - 88

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2085 of 2020

Appellant :- Jay Prakash Verma And Another

Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Appellant :- Himanshu Srivastava

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Purushottam Mani Tripathi

Hon'ble Mohd. Aslam,J.

1.

This criminal appeal is preferred under Section 14-A (1) of SC/ST

Act for quashing the further proceedings of Special Session Trial No.

419 of 2019 (State vs. Jai Prakash and another), arising out of Case

Crime No. 96 of 2017, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 427 of I.P.C. and

Section 3 (1) (Da) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Ramkola, District-

Kushinagar, pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge/Special

Judge, SC/ST (PA) Act, Kushinagar at Padrauna as well as the

summoning order dated 16.10.2019.

2.

The brief facts necessary for disposal of this appeal is that

opposite party no.2 has lodged the first information report on the basis of

written complaint on 13.04.2019 at 23:21 P.M. against five named and

one unknown accused persons including the appellant with the allegation

that on 13.04.2019 at about 7:30 P.M. accused persons had snatched the

key of his motorcycle due to old trivial issue using caste indicating

words like Khattik, Chamaria abused him with filthy language and had

also beaten him with fists, kicks, lathi, danda and damaged his

motorcycle. The accused had also snatched the mobile of his companion

Aditya Govind Rao. The informant has sustained multiple injuries on his

body and got his injuries medically examined at Government Hospital

Ramkola and keeping in view the seriousness of the injuries the doctor

has referred him to the District Hospital.

3.

The injured/informant Rajkumar Maurya was medically examined

on 13.04.2019 at 8 P.M. at CHC Ramkola wherein six injuries were

2

found on the body of the injured. The injury nos.1 and 3 were kept under

observation and referred to CHC, Kushinagar for expert opinion. Rest

injuries were found simple in nature. Duration of the injuries was found

fresh. The investigation of the case was conducted by Circle Officer

Naveen Kumar Nayak who recorded the statement of witnesses, visited

the place of occurrence and prepared the site-plan. After completion of

investigation, he has submitted the charge-sheet against accused-

appellant Jai Prakash Verma and Sunil Verma under Sections 323, 504,

506, 427 I.P.C. and Section 3 (1) (Da) of SC/ST Act.

4.

Heard learned counsel for the accused-appellant, learned counsel

for opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State-

respondent and perused the record.

5.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the accused-appellant that

the impugned order dated 16.10.2019, by which cognizance of offence

was taken by the court below, is illegal, arbitrary and is based on

surmises and conjectures. It is further submitted that some dispute has

taken place between the informant and accused-appellant and the

informant has abused the appellant and only on mere asking not to abuse

the first information report has been lodged against the appellant and

other accused persons on the basis of false and concocted story. The

accused-appellant neither has abused the opposite party no.2 using cast

indicating words nor has beaten him as alleged in the first information

report. In fact, on the day of incident the informant was drunken and fell

down near the shop of accused-appellant on account of which he has

sustained injuries. It is also submitted that the cognizance order on the

charge-sheet was passed merely by filling up the printed proforma.

Learned court below has not applied its mind before taking cognizance

of the offence, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set-aside.

6.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the

submissions of learned counsel for the accused-appellant and supported

the order of lower court, but he could not dispute that t