Allahabad High Court
Chhedi Lal @ Chhedi Ram vs State Of U.P And Anr on 5 December, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:81183 Court No. - 20 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2571 of 2015 Applicant :- Chhedi Lal @ Chhedi Ram Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Ram Ji Trivedi Hon'ble Arvind Singh Sangwan,J.
1. This petition has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned Charge Sheet No. 172/2013 under Sections 323, 504, 506 of IPC and Section 3 (i) (x) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station - Bazarshukul, District-Amethi as well as all the consequential proceedings of Criminal Case No. 667 of 2013 (State vs. Ram Naresh and others) including bailable warrant dated 02.03.2015 issued by the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 23, Amethi.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation in the F.I.R. is that the cattle of the informant had gone in the field of the petitioner and by raising dispute, the petitioner abused nephew and sister-in-law of the informant in the name of their caste. Counsel submits that though there is allegation that they were also given beatings by fist-blows, however, neither there is any medico-legal report nor there is any witness who has stated that the petitioner has given beatings to any person. Counsel submits that only dispute was regarding the damage caused to the crop of the petitioner by cattle of the informant which has been converted into present F.I.R. by invoking provisions of section 3 (i) (x) of SC/ST Act.
3. Counsel submits that, as per the F.I.R., the incident took place in the field of the petitioner, whereas as per the prosecution itself, the cattle of the informant side have caused the damage and, therefore, it is not a place where anything was done in public view to abuse the informant.
4. Learned counsel has relied upon the judgment of Supreme Court in Hitesh Verma Vs. State of Uttarakhand, AIR 2021 SC (Crl.) 522 whereas the Supreme Court has observed as under:
"...18. Therefore, offence under the Act is not established merely on the fact that the informant is a member of Scheduled Caste unless there is an intention to humiliate a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe for the reason that the victim belongs to such caste. In the present case, the parties are litigating over possession of the land. The allegation of hurling of abuses is against a person who claims title over the property. If such person happens to be a Scheduled Caste, the offence under Section 3(1)(r) of the Act is not made out."
5. This petition is pending since 2015 and on 4.6.2015, it was directed that no coercive action be taken against the petitioners neither any reply has been filed on behalf of the State nor on behalf of the informant.
6. After hearing counsel for the parties, in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Hitesh Verma's Case (supra), it is apparent that the dispute is with regard to damage caused to the crop of the petitioner and, therefore, no offence as alleged in the Criminal Case is made out.
7. Accordingly, this application is allowed. The impugned order as well as Criminal Case No. 667 of 2013 and all consequential proceedings so far as they relate to the petitioner are quashed and set aside.
Order Date :- 5.12.2024 DKS