High Court · 2025

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that a first information report stood lodged by opposite party no.2 who happens to the father of the injured/ victim under section 323, 308 IPC read with section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act, FIR No. 0041 of 2024 on 22.02.2024 at 15.06 hours relatable to the commission of offences on 21.02.2024 at 18:00 hours with an allegation that the son of the opposite party no.2 is aged about 16 years who is pursuing studies in electrical engineering and on 21.02.2024 at 06:00 hrs when he has gone to eat something from a food stall then the applicant along with two others accused who belongs to different community, different caste, administered beating, pursuant to which the son of opposite party no.2 sustained injuries and there was possibility that the teeth would have also been damaged which could have jeoparadize the future of the injured/ victim while forestalling this prospect to get a job. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that as per annexure-3 the injured was examined and wherein the nature of injuries given below:

1. Abraded contusion of size 6.5 x 2 cm over left side fact X-ray.

2. L/w of size 1 x 0.5 cm over right side forehead above 3.5 cm from right eyebrow X-ray skull A.P./ Lat.

6. The son of opposite party no.2 was also subjected to radiological examination wherein no bone injury were seen and the injuries were found to be simple in nature. Learned counsel for the applicant has further invited the attention of the Court toward annexure-6 page 60 of the paper book so as to further contend that in the statement of the first informant, the same allegations which were referred to in the first information report was narrated and while further inviting attention towards annexure-7 at page 63 being the statement of the victim/ injured, it has been deposed that the incident took place on account of the fact that the applicant fraction and son of the opposite party no. 2 were resorting in arm wrestling near the shop where the snacks were being sold, the same stemmed into heated exchange and also blow was exchanged between the parties and the applicant hurled caste based abuses. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that it is not a case wherein there was an intention to commit the said offence particularly when on the spur of the moment, the environment got surcharged and it was on account of the age and the immaturity of the applicant which stemmed such type of occurrence. The submission is that once the applicant is juvenile then a certain amount of liverage is to be accorded. For the reasons that it was not intentional and it was never the preconceived notion or the intention of the applicant to injure the son of opposite party no.2. He further submits that so far as the allegations contained in the first information report that the son of opposite party no. 2/ victim/ injured was administered beating only on the ground that he belongs to SC category is concerned, there is no specific recital in the FIR and further so far as the hurling of caste based abuses is concerned, the same does not find place in the FIR but in the statement of injured for the very first time hurling of caste base abuses has been injected. Reliance has been placed upon the judgment in the case of Hitesh Verma vs. State of Uttarakhand 2010 (10) SCC 710 so as to contend that the offence is not necessary to be established merely on the fact that the informant or the injured was a member of SC category unless there is intention to humiliate the member of SC/ST category for the reasons that victim belongs to the said caste. Further reliance has been placed upon the judgment in the case of Iqbal and Ors vs. State of U.P. AIR 2023 SCC 3731 so as to content that it is not enough for the Court to look into the averments made in the first information report/ complaint alone for the purposes of ascertaining whether necessary ingredients to construe the alleged offences are disclosed or not. In frivolous or fictitious proceedings, the courts are duty bound to look into many other attending circumstances emerging from the record of the case, over and above the averments and thus it is argued that mens rea is not proved from the version in the complaint or statement of the witness. Further reliance has been placed upon the judgment in the case of Shahjans Sakaria vs. State of Kerala AIR SC 4557.

7. Countering the submissions so raised by the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Wahid Jamal who holds the brief of Mr. Shahibe Alam, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 submits that once it has come on record from the medico legal examination that the two injuries as noticed above stood sustained by son of opposite party no.2 and in the radiological examination report, there was no bone injury then it becomes a case under section 323/308 of IPC. He further submits that though in the first information report there is no recital of hurling of caste abuses but the first information report had been lodged by the informant who is the father and what would be relevant is the statement of the injured who was an eye witness to the same. According to him the judgment sought to be relied upon by the applicant cannot be of any aid or assistance.

8. Sri S.K. Singh, learned AGA for the State supported the argument made by learned counsel for the applicant, according to him the summoning order is perfectly valid in accordance with and no fault whatsoever can be attributed in this regard.

9. I have heard the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully.

10. The sole question which arise for determination in the present proceedings at this stage is the extent of judicial intervention. Apparently an FIR stood lodged by the opposite party no.2/ first informant on 22.02.2024 under section 323, 308 IPC read with section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act against the applicant and two others who are all juvenile. The allegation is that the son of opposite party no.2 who was 16 years of age who had gone to eat some snacks from the vendor and was administered beating and extended blow pursuant whereto injuries were sustained in the head of the injured which could have resulted in damaging of teeth and jeoparadize the future and creating an obstacle in getting an employment. In the FIR there is no allegation that the applicant was fully knowing and he intentionally humiliated the son of opposite party no.2 who belongs to SC community. There is no allegation of resorting to hurling caste based abuses in the first information report. Moreover, what is relevant is the fact that the applicant and the son of opposite party no.2 are juvenile and in the statement of the injured who had sustained injuries, it has been submitted specifically deposed in categorical terms that the applicant fraction as well as the injured were in playful mood as they were showing the strength while locking their hands by way of arm wrestling. There is noting in the FIR or in the deposition that there was any previous enmity between them and rather the narration of the facts in the FIR and the complaint shows that the applicant fraction (including applicant) and the opposite party no.2- son were knowing each other and having good relationship that is why they were resorting to arm wrestling. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hitesh Verma (Supra) in paragraph 18 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."

11. Interestingly the tenor of the FIR itself shows that what was being pressed into service was the fact that the fight took place post heated arguments wherein injuries were sustained. The observation made in the judgment in the case of Iqbal (Supra) would also come into rescue of the applicant particularly when the surroundings factors are to be also seen which includes the age as well as the fact that the applicant fraction (applicant) and the opposite party no.2 son happens to be in playful mood while drawing an inference in that regard. In the opinion of the Court since there is nothing either in the FIR or in the statement of the injured or the informant that there was an intention to humiliate the member of SC/ST for the reasons that the victim belong to the said caste, thus, in the facts and the circumstances of the case, offences under section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act are not made out. However, so far as the offences under section 323, 308 IPC is concerned, prima facie they seem to have been attracted in view of the nature of injuries.

12. Accordingly, the application is allowed. The cognizance order as well as charge sheet dated 30.03.2024 under section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act is quashed. In case the applicant files a discharge application under section 323/308 IPC within a two months from today i.e. by 09.06.2025, the court of Principal Judge, Juvenile Justice Board, Baghpat shall decide the discharge application with most expedition. Till the disposal of the discharge application, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in case crime no. 41 of 2024 under Section 323, 308 IPC P.S. Binauli, District Baghpat. The protection accorded to the applicant is only available subject to compliance of the terms and conditions and timeline as provided herein and in case of default, the order shall stand vacated without reference to the Bench. Order Date :- 10.4.2025 /C. MANI CHANDRAMANI VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Vikas Budhwar,J.)

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that a first information report stood lodged by opposite party no.2 who happens to the father of the injured/ victim under section 323, 308 IPC read with section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act, FIR No. 0041 of 2024 on 22.02.2024 at 15.06 hours relatable to the commission of offences on 21.02.2024 at 18:00 hours with an allegation that the son of the opposite party no.2 is aged about 16 years who is pursuing studies in electrical engineering and on 21.02.2024 at 06:00 hrs when he has gone to eat something from a food stall then the applicant along with two others accused who belongs to different community, different caste, administered beating, pursuant to which the son of opposite party no.2 sustained injuries and there was possibility that the teeth would have also been damaged which could have jeoparadize the future of the injured/ victim while forestalling this prospect to get a job. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that as per annexure-3 the injured was examined and wherein the nature of injuries given below:

1. Abraded contusion of size 6.5 x 2 cm over left side fact X-ray.

2. L/w of size 1 x 0.5 cm over right side forehead above 3.5 cm from right eyebrow X-ray skull A.P./ Lat.

6. The son of opposite party no.2 was also subjected to radiological examination wherein no bone injury were seen and the injuries were found to be simple in nature. Learned counsel for the applicant has further invited the attention of the Court toward annexure-6 page 60 of the paper book so as to further contend that in the statement of the first informant, the same allegations which were referred to in the first information report was narrated and while further inviting attention towards annexure-7 at page 63 being the statement of the victim/ injured, it has been deposed that the incident took place on account of the fact that the applicant fraction and son of the opposite party no. 2 were resorting in arm wrestling near the shop where the snacks were being sold, the same stemmed into heated exchange and also blow was exchanged between the parties and the applicant hurled caste based abuses. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that it is not a case wherein there was an intention to commit the said offence particularly when on the spur of the moment, the environment got surcharged and it was on account of the age and the immaturity of the applicant which stemmed such type of occurrence. The submission is that once the applicant is juvenile then a certain amount of liverage is to be accorded. For the reasons that it was not intentional and it was never the preconceived notion or the intention of the applicant to injure the son of opposite party no.2. He further submits that so far as the allegations contained in the first information report that the son of opposite party no. 2/ victim/ injured was administered beating only on the ground that he belongs to SC category is concerned, there is no specific recital in the FIR and further so far as the hurling of caste based abuses is concerned, the same does not find place in the FIR but in the statement of injured for the very first time hurling of caste base abuses has been injected. Reliance has been placed upon the judgment in the case of Hitesh Verma vs. State of Uttarakhand 2010 (10) SCC 710 so as to contend that the offence is not necessary to be established merely on the fact that the informant or the injured was a member of SC category unless there is intention to humiliate the member of SC/ST category for the reasons that victim belongs to the said caste. Further reliance has been placed upon the judgment in the case of Iqbal and Ors vs. State of U.P. AIR 2023 SCC 3731 so as to content that it is not enough for the Court to look into the averments made in the first information report/ complaint alone for the purposes of ascertaining whether necessary ingredients to construe the alleged offences are disclosed or not. In frivolous or fictitious proceedings, the courts are duty bound to look into many other attending circumstances emerging from the record of the case, over and above the averments and thus it is argued that mens rea is not proved from the version in the complaint or statement of the witness. Further reliance has been placed upon the judgment in the case of Shahjans Sakaria vs. State of Kerala AIR SC 4557.

7. Countering the submissions so raised by the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Wahid Jamal who holds the brief of Mr. Shahibe Alam, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 submits that once it has come on record from the medico legal examination that the two injuries as noticed above stood sustained by son of opposite party no.2 and in the radiological examination report, there was no bone injury then it becomes a case under section 323/308 of IPC. He further submits that though in the first information report there is no recital of hurling of caste abuses but the first information report had been lodged by the informant who is the father and what would be relevant is the statement of the injured who was an eye witness to the same. According to him the judgment sought to be relied upon by the applicant cannot be of any aid or assistance.

8. Sri S.K. Singh, learned AGA for the State supported the argument made by learned counsel for the applicant, according to him the summoning order is perfectly valid in accordance with and no fault whatsoever can be attributed in this regard.

9. I have heard the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully.

10. The sole question which arise for determination in the present proceedings at this stage is the extent of judicial intervention. Apparently an FIR stood lodged by the opposite party no.2/ first informant on 22.02.2024 under section 323, 308 IPC read with section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act against the applicant and two others who are all juvenile. The allegation is that the son of opposite party no.2 who was 16 years of age who had gone to eat some snacks from the vendor and was administered beating and extended blow pursuant whereto injuries were sustained in the head of the injured which could have resulted in damaging of teeth and jeoparadize the future and creating an obstacle in getting an employment. In the FIR there is no allegation that the applicant was fully knowing and he intentionally humiliated the son of opposite party no.2 who belongs to SC community. There is no allegation of resorting to hurling caste based abuses in the first information report. Moreover, what is relevant is the fact that the applicant and the son of opposite party no.2 are juvenile and in the statement of the injured who had sustained injuries, it has been submitted specifically deposed in categorical terms that the applicant fraction as well as the injured were in playful mood as they were showing the strength while locking their hands by way of arm wrestling. There is noting in the FIR or in the deposition that there was any previous enmity between them and rather the narration of the facts in the FIR and the complaint shows that the applicant fraction (including applicant) and the opposite party no.2- son were knowing each other and having good relationship that is why they were resorting to arm wrestling. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hitesh Verma (Supra) in paragraph 18 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."

11. Interestingly the tenor of the FIR itself shows that what was being pressed into service was the fact that the fight took place post heated arguments wherein injuries were sustained. The observation made in the judgment in the case of Iqbal (Supra) would also come into rescue of the applicant particularly when the surroundings factors are to be also seen which includes the age as well as the fact that the applicant fraction (applicant) and the opposite party no.2 son happens to be in playful mood while drawing an inference in that regard. In the opinion of the Court since there is nothing either in the FIR or in the statement of the injured or the informant that there was an intention to humiliate the member of SC/ST for the reasons that the victim belong to the said caste, thus, in the facts and the circumstances of the case, offences under section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act are not made out. However, so far as the offences under section 323, 308 IPC is concerned, prima facie they seem to have been attracted in view of the nature of injuries.

12. Accordingly, the application is allowed. The cognizance order as well as charge sheet dated 30.03.2024 under section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act is quashed. In case the applicant files a discharge application under section 323/308 IPC within a two months from today i.e. by 09.06.2025, the court of Principal Judge, Juvenile Justice Board, Baghpat shall decide the discharge application with most expedition. Till the disposal of the discharge application, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in case crime no. 41 of 2024 under Section 323, 308 IPC P.S. Binauli, District Baghpat. The protection accorded to the applicant is only available subject to compliance of the terms and conditions and timeline as provided herein and in case of default, the order shall stand vacated without reference to the Bench. Order Date :- 10.4.2025 /C. MANI CHANDRAMANI VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Vikas Budhwar,J.)