Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

By way of this petition filed under Section 482 CrPC, petitioner prays to set aside impugned order dated 25.01.2023 passed by ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak, whereby petitioner has been charge-sheeted under Sections 363, 323, 325 & 506 IPC; and Section 3(1)(s) & 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 [for shot 'the SC/ST Act'] in a case arising out of FIR No.79 dated 03.03.2021 registered at Police Station Purani Sabzi Mandi, Rohtak, under Sections 148/149/323/363/379B/506 IPC and Section 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act.

(ii) FIR was registered. After conducting necessary investigation, Sections 379 and 363 IPC were deleted. Anita w/o Ravinder, Sushila w/o Sisram, Virender s/o Sisram and Sumit s/o Virender were found innocent and so, Sections 148 & 149 IPC were deleted. After completion of 2 of 7 Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:162983 CRM-M-28465-2023 2023:PHHC:162983 investigation, final report under Section 173 Cr.PC was filed to prosecute the petitioner under Sections 323, 506 & 325 IPC and Section 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act.

(iii) After hearing both the sides, ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak ordered framing of the charge against the petitioner under Sections 363/323/325/506 IPC besides Sections 3(1)(s) & 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act. Ld. Court also observed that accused-petitioner was not liable to be charge- sheeted under Section 379B IPC, because complainant had not disclosed the registration number of the motorcycles, which were allegedly snatched and besides, it was found during investigation that motorcycles were recovered from the spot in the broken condition and there was no allegation that accused-petitioner had broken the same.

13. In this case, apart from others, offences under Sections 323/ 325/363/506 IPC are also alleged to have been committed, all of which fall in the Schedule attached with Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act. It is not the case of the petitioner that he did not know that complainant was a member of a Scheduled Caste.

14. In the aforesaid circumstances, ld. Trial Court was justified in coming to the conclusion that there was a prima facie case, so as to frame the charge against the accused - petitioner under Section 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act, apart from the other provisions of IPC. Thus, this Court finds no merit in the present petition and as such, the same is hereby dismissed.