Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1256 (ALL)

Abhay Pratap Singh Bhadoria v. State of U. P.

2016-04-06

OM PRAKASH VII

body2016
JUDGMENT Om Prakash-VII,J. The present application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings including order dated 28.8.2015 in case crime no. 215 of 2014 under Sections 302, 307/34 IPC and 3(2) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short 'SC/ST Act'), P.S. Sipri Bazar, Jhansi, District Jhansi pending in the court of Special Judge (SC/ST) Act, Jhansi arising out of S.T. No. 50 of 2014 against the applicant nos. 1 and 2. Further prayer has been made to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid Session Trial. 2. Heard Shri V.S. Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and the learned AGA appearing for the State and perused the record. 3. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that offence under Sections 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act is not attracted in the present matter against the applicant nos. 1 and 2. The deceased died due to negligence on the part of doctors. In the matter, initially a First Information Report was lodged under Section 307 IPC and later on it was converted into the offence under Sections 302 IPC and 3(2) (v) SC/ST Act. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the applicants placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in Ramdas vs. State of Maharashtra, Laws (SC) 2006-11-161. 4. On the other hand, learned AGA submitted that there is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. 5. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the entire record including the case law cited by the learned counsel for the applicants. 6. In the present matter, a perusal of the record shows that charge against applicant nos. 1 and 2 i.e. Abhay Pratap Singh and Lucky Khare was framed for the offence under Section 302 /34 IPC and 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act and against applicant nos.3 and 4 i.e. Akash Balmiki and Pappu Ahirwar under Sections 302/34 IPC. The matter is at the stage of evidence. Further, a perusal of the F.I.R. goes to show that abuses were hurled and caste aspersions were made and the applicants assaulted the deceased with their illegal arms with intention to kill and deceased died during treatment. The matter is at the stage of evidence. Further, a perusal of the F.I.R. goes to show that abuses were hurled and caste aspersions were made and the applicants assaulted the deceased with their illegal arms with intention to kill and deceased died during treatment. Moreover, at the stage of framing of charge, the court dealing with the matter has to see only prima-facie case and from the material available on record, it cannot be said that no prima-facie case is made out against the applicants. Accused persons belonging to Schedule Caste were not charged for the offence under Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act but the persons belonging to general category have been charged for the offence under Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act. Hence, in my view, no interference in the matter is warranted by this Court. The court concerned has rightly rejected the prayer of the applicants. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order. 7. So far as the law laid down by the Apex Court in Ramdas case (supra), relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicants, is concerned, the applicants cannot get any help with the said decision as the facts of the said case are distinguishable with the present case. 8. In view of the aforesaid discussions, I am of the opinion that no ground is made out to interfere with the matter. There is no infirmity or illegality in the order dated 28.8.2015. The application being devoid of merits is liable to be dismissed and the same is accordingly dismissed.