High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:79207 Court No. - 52 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 15782 of 2025 Applicant :- Tribhuwan Yadav And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kailash Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kamlesh Kumar Yadav Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Legal Reasoning
Heard Mr. Kailash Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the entire material available on record. The present application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated 05.01.2025 and cognizance/summoning order dated 13.02.2025 as well as the entire proceedings of Session Trial No.155 of 2025 (State Vs. Tribhuwan Yadav), arising out of Case Crime No.0184 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 351(3), 352 BNS and Section 3(2)(5Ka), 3(1)Da of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Birno, District-Ghazipur, pending in the Court of Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Ghazipur. Brief facts of the case are that for the incident dated 24.09.2024 at about 09:00 p.m., an FIR has been lodged by opposite party no.2 through an application U/s 173(4) BNSS, on 15.12.2024 at about 18:41 hrs, under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 351(3), 352, 333 BNS and Section 3(2)(5Ka), 3(1)Da, 3(1)(dha) of SC/ST Act. The allegations are detailed in the FIR. After investigation, charge sheet has been submitted pursuant to which the applicant has been summoned. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that for the incident dated 24.09.2024 at about 09:00 p.m., the present FIR has been lodged on 15.12.2024 through an application U/s 173(4) BNSS without giving any plausible explanation for the delay. He further submits that in order to wreak vengeance and also to exert pressure upon the applicants, the present FIR has been lodged as a counterblast to the earlier FIR lodged by the applicant no.1 against the opposite party no.2 and his brother; Pradeep Kumar for the incident dated 24.09.2024. He further submits that the caste indicative words has alleged to be used, but not specified, therefore, no offence under Section SC/ST Act is made out against the applicants. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. He, therefore, submits that the charge- sheet, summoning order as well as entire proceedings be quashed by this Court as the same is an abuse process of Court. Per Contra, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and the learned A.G.A. for the State have opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants by submitting that from the version of FIR as well as statement of charge sheet witnesses, prima facie, offence is made out. The incident has been admitted by the applicants as for the same incident, the FIR has already been lodged by the applicant no.1. The opposite party no.2 has sustained injuries, thus the entire incident is proved. As regards the contention of the learned counsel for the applicants that no offence under SC/ST Act is made out, it is clear that the opposite party No. 2 belongs to the Scheduled Caste category and he has been abused, humiliated and insulted. It is necessary that the caste indicative words should have been used for making out an offence under SC/ST Act. He further submits that all the contentions raised by the applicants' counsel relate to disputed questions of fact. On the basis of material on record after conducting of statutory investigation under Chapter XII Cr.P.C. by the investigating officer, a strong prima facie case is made out against the applicants for the commission of the alleged incident. In support of his case, learned AGA has placed reliance upon the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Dilbag Rai Vs. State of Haryana & Others reported in AIR 2019 (SC) 693 and Central Bureau of in Investigation Vs. MANU/SC/1432/2019. Arvind Khanna reported I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the present application. This Court finds that the submissions made by the applicants' learned counsel call for adjudication on pure questions of fact which may adequately be adjudicated upon only by the trial court and while doing so even the submissions made on points of law can also be more appropriately gone into by the trial court in this case. The issue whether it is appropriate for this Court being the Highest Court to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS to quash the charge-sheet and the proceedings at the stage when the Magistrate has merely issued process against the applicants and trial is to yet to come only on the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicants that present criminal case initiated by opposite party no.2 are not only malicious but also abuse of process of law has elaborately been discussed by the Apex Court in the following judgments:- (i) R.P. Kapur Versus State of Punjab; AIR 1960 SC 866, (ii) State of Haryana & Ors. Versus Ch. Bhajan Lal & Ors.;1992 Supp.(1) SCC 335, (iii) State of Bihar & Anr. Versus P.P. Sharma & Anr.; 1992 Supp (1) SCC 222, (iv) Zandu Pharmaceuticals Works Ltd. & Ors. Versus Mohammad Shariful Haque & Anr.; 2005 (1) SCC 122, (v) M. N. Ojha Vs. Alok Kumar Srivastava; 2009 (9) SCC 682, (vi) Mohd. Allauddin Khan Vs. The State of Bihar & Others; 2019 0 Supreme (SC) 454, (vii) Nallapareddy Sridhar Reddy Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.; 2020 0 Supreme (SC) 45, and lastly (viii) Rajeev Kaurav Vs. Balasahab & Others; 2020 0 Supreme (SC) 143. In view of the aforesaid, this Court does not deem it proper, and therefore cannot be persuaded to have a pre-trial before the actual trial begins. A threadbare discussion of various facts and circumstances, as they emerge from the allegations made against the accused, is being purposely avoided by the Court for the reason, lest the same might cause any prejudice to either side during trial. But it shall suffice to observe that the perusal of the F.I.R. and the material collected by the Investigating Officer on the basis of which the charge sheet has been submitted makes out a prima facie case against the accused at this stage and there appear to be sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. I do not find any justification to quash the charge sheet or the proceedings against the applicants arising out of them as the case does not fall in any of the categories recognized by the Apex Court which may justify their quashing. The prayer for quashing the impugned charge-sheet dated 05.01.2025 and summoning order dated 13.02.2025 as well as the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case are refused, as I do not see any abuse of the court's process at this pre-trial stage. The present application has no merit and is, accordingly, rejected. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 Jitendra/- Digitally signed by :- JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad