Allahabad High Court
Dushyant Kumar @ Dushyant Lawaniya And ... vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 September, 2022
Author: Neeraj Tiwari
Bench: Neeraj Tiwari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2628 of 2021 Appellant :- Dushyant Kumar @ Dushyant Lawaniya And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Mahesh Chandra Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- Vijay Tripathi Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Heard learned counsel for appellants, learned A.G.A. for State and Sri Vijay Tripathi, learned counsel for respondent No. 2.
By means of the present criminal appeal under Section 14A-1, the appellant is assailing the legality and validity of the order dated 19.03.2021 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Agra, in S.S.T. no. 93 of 2020 arising out of case crime no. 415 of 2019, under Sections 427, 447, 504, 506 IPC, under Section 3(1)(da), (Dha) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Jagdishpura, District- Agra.
Learned counsel for appellant submitted that appellant has filed discharge application dated 05.02.2021, under section 227 Cr.P.C., which was rejected vide impugned order dated 19.03.2021 without properly appreciating the evidence available on record. It is next submitted that charge sheet has been filed under Sections 427, 447, 504, 506 IPC, under Section 3(1)(da), (Dha) of SC/ST Act. He specially pointed out that so far as section 447 IPC is concerned, no notice has ever been issued to the appellant under Section 441 IPC, therefore, charge sheet may not be filed under section 447 IPC. Similarly, in other sections also, charge sheet has been submitted in very same way. Therefore, impugned order is bad and liable to be set aside.
Learned counsels for respondents vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for appellants and submitted that except section 447 IPC, charge sheet filed in other sections are after properly appreciating the evidence, which may be verified from the F.I.R. as well as statements recorded by the Investigating Officer. They have fairly conceded that so far as section 447 IPC is concerned, from the perusal of record, it appears that no notice has been issued under Section 441 IPC to the appellant.
Being confronted by the Court, except Section 447 IPC, learned counsel for appellant could not point out as to how charge sheet in other sections are bad in law.
I have considered rival submissions advanced by counsels for parties and perused the records.
From the perusal of records, it is apparent that notice under Section 441 IPC has not been issued to the appellant before filing charge sheet under section 447 IPC, which is not considered by the court below, therefore, charge sheet so far as it relates to section 447 IPC is bad and about other sections, no interference is required by the Court.
Appellant is given liberty to raise specific objection about the non-issuance of notice under section 441 IPC before filing charge sheet under section 447 IPC at the time of framing of charges under section 228 Cr.P.C. He is also having liberty to raise objection about other sections at the very same time.
Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Agra is directed to consider the objection, if raised by the appellant and pass fresh order strictly in accordance with law as well as observations made by this Court.
With the aforesaid observations, appeal is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 13.9.2022 Sartaj