JUDGMENT : SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J. 1. These applications are heard qua to surviving applicants. They are aggrieved by impugned charge sheet dated 27.06.2019 as well as entire proceedings of SST No. 34/2019 (State vs. Faheem and Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 204/2019 under Sections 147, 279, 323, 427, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)(r) and (s) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Jalaun, District- Jalaun, pending before Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Jalaun at Orai. 2. Trial Court took cognizance of offence on 27.11.2019 and applicants were summoned by order of date though above referred both orders are not specifically challenged though it might fall within ‘further entire proceedings’. 3. S/Sri Mohd. Shahibe Alam Khan and Wahid Jamal, learned advocates for applicants have submitted that it was a case of road rage. Complainant has alleged that he was driving an ALTO car along with co-passenger and there was traffic jam during which applicant (Faheem) who was driving Tavera without looking at rear side, reversed his Tavera and hit the ALTO car on its front side and when it was objected, said Faheem called other applicants and not only assaulted complainant and co-passenger but also damaged his car and hurled caste abuses as well. 4. This Court has passed following order on 04.02.2020: “The applicant, by means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with prayer to quash the charge sheet No. 01 of 2019, dated 27.06.2019 as well as entire proceeding of S.S.T. No. 34 of 2019 (State Versus Faheem and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 204 of 2019, under Sections 147, 279, 323, 427, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1) Da, Dha SC/ST Act, Police Station Jalaun, District Jalaun. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the record. Ms. Divya Ojha, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Vijay Singh Sengar, learned counsel for applicant argued that from the very perusal of first information report, it is apparent that no abuse or assault is with intention to assault or abuse because of being a member of scheduled caste or scheduled tribe community. It was a case of road rage, wherein no such question arises. It was a case of road rage, wherein no such question arises. Moreso, complainant himself has written in its F.I.R. that he was not aware of accused persons, rather upon making query from the persons present thereat, he could gather the name of driver and other accused persons, leaving behind 7 to 8 others, involved in it. Thereafter, no identification parade for fixation of identity by Investigating Officer was conducted and applicant has been implicated and charge sheeted, as above, for his no fault. The matter requires hearing on merit. Learned A.G.A. has accepted notice on behalf of opposite party No. 1. Issue notice to opposite party No. 2 returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within ten days. Opposite party no. 2 may file counter affidavit within four weeks. Learned A.G.A. may also file counter affidavit within the same period. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter. List in the week commencing 13th April, 2020. Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the above mentioned case.” 5. Learned advocates for applicants have submitted that applicants have no prior acquaintance with complainant and co-passenger travelling in ALTO, therefore, there was no chance that he could know their caste, as such, basic ingredients of Section 3(1)(Da)(Dha) of SC/ST Act are not made out since there is a requirement that there must be intentionally insult, however, such intention was absolutely missing since the applicants had no knowledge that complainant and his co-passenger belongs to SC/ST. 6. Learned advocates have further submitted that name of applicants were disclosed allegedly on basis of information given by independent person, however, none of independent witnesses was examined during investigation. The I.O. has also not able to ascertain names of 7-8 unknown persons and that complainant and his associate was not legally medical examined. 7. Aforesaid submissions were opposed by Sri R.K. Mishra, learned AGA for State that investigation was conducted in a fair manner. Statement of complainant was recorded who has supported the prosecution case though it has not been denied that no independent witness was examined despite occurrence was allegedly took place in public place and name of applicants were also disclosed by public as well as that there was no evidence that applicants were prior acquainted with complainant and co-passenger and applicants knew that they belong to SC/ST. No identification parade was conducted for identification of assailants. 8. Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the record. 9. I have carefully perused statement of the complainant and for reference, same is quoted below: 10. Above referred statement does not disclose that applicants were prior acquainted or they got knowledge during occurrence that complainant and co-passenger belongs to SC/ST that there was an intention to insult them being SC/ST, therefore, basic ingredients of Section 3(1)(Da)(Dha) of SC/ST Act are absolutely missing. 11. The Investigating Officer has in a very cursory and casual manner investigated the case without ascertaining that basic ingredients of Section 3(1)(Da)(Dha) of SC/ST Act was prima facie made out or not. 12. In view of above, Court also takes note that it was case of road rage and there was no injury report placed on record. Court also takes note that source of name of applicants as referred in statement were independent persons allegedly present at the place of occurrence, however, none of independent witness was examined during investigation which also indicates that investigation was conducted in a very cursory manner. No attempt was taken for conducting identification parade. 13. In aforesaid circumstances, this Court finds that present is a fit case where inherent powers of this Court could be invoked, hence, impugned charge sheet dated 27.06.2019 arising out of Case Crime No. 204/2019 under Sections 147, 279, 323, 427, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)(r) and (s) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Jalaun, District- Jalaun as well as further proceedings of SST No. 34/2019 (State vs. Faheem and others) including cognizance and summoning order pending before Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Jalaun at Orai are hereby quashed. 14. Application is, accordingly, allowed. 15. Registrar (Compliance) to take steps.