Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.26 seconds)

State Of Haryana And Ors vs Ch. Bhajan Lal And Ors on 21 November, 1990

7. On consideration of the rival submission, this Court is not satisfied as the order passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Special Court for the trial of cases under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocity), is found mechanical. He had not applied mind to understand the gravity of the issues involved. The charges were framed for the offences under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)(va) of Schedule Castes and the Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 1989 read with Section 506(i) of IPC. These are lesser https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/8 Crl.O.P.No.23452 of 2021 and Crl.M.P.No.12864 of 2021 offences compared to offence under Section 376 IPC. Without understanding the gravity of the situation, the learned Principal District Judge, Special Court for the trial of cases under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocity) had mechanically, as though he is presiding as a Civil Judge and petition are filed across the table by the learned counsel for the disputing parties in Civil Court, passed an order which had created this problem whereby valuable defence of the accused guaranteed under the Constitution of India had been ignored by the learned Principal District Judge, which cannot be condoned. Therefore, the same is set aside as per the reported ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana Vs Bhajan Lal being reported in 1992 AIR 604, where there are guidelines issued to the High Court exercising its extraordinary powers for abuse of the process of Court and also for safeguarding the rights of litigants. The action of the learned counsel for the defence who is expected to protect the right of the Accused as per the right guaranteed under the Constitution of India and also the learned Sessions Judge presiding from the present Court is found unacceptable and unreasonable.
Supreme Court of India Cites 44 - Cited by 19733 - S R Pandian - Full Document
1