Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2025 DIGILAW 784 (SC)

Khushwinder Singh v. State Of Uttar Pradesh

2025-03-18

K.VINOD CHANDRAN, SUDHANSHU DHULIA

body2025
ORDER : Leave granted. 2. Office Report dated 17.03.2025 indicates that Respondent No.2, though served as long back as on 26.12.2024, has not entered appearance till date. 3. The appellants before this Court are the Officers of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. [BPCL]. Respondent No. 2, who was an ex-MLA, was appointed as a Retail Outlet Dealer of BPCL at Bareilly. But since certain anomalies were found in the petrol pump, proceedings took place regarding cancellation of the Licence and the operation of the petrol pump was suspended by the Petroleum Company, of which the present appellants are the officers. 4. In the meanwhile, Respondent No. 2, who was an ex-MLA, filed an FIR against the present appellants under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 201 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code and a writ petition was filed to quash this FIR before the High Court. 5. Another complaint has been moved by the complainant, (i.e. Respondent No. 2) and in exercise of powers under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., the Magistrate has summoned the accused for having committed the offence under Section 3(1)(r) and (s) of the SC/ST Act and Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellants challenged the summoning order under Section 14A of the SC/ST Act before the High Court, which has been dismissed. 6. Apart from various grounds taken by the appellants denying the allegations itself, even as per the averments in the complaint, nothing happened in public view, as required under Section 3(1)(r) and (s) of the SC/ST Act, which is reproduced as under :- "3(1)(r) intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in any place within public view; 3(1)(s) abuses any member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe by caste name in any place within public view" 7. The complainant has filed a complaint against the appellants before the BPCL under the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas where there is no mention of the incident that took place on 07.07.2017. But all these facts have not been considered by the High Court at all. Para 6 of the impugned order is reproduced as under :- "6. The complainant has filed a complaint against the appellants before the BPCL under the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas where there is no mention of the incident that took place on 07.07.2017. But all these facts have not been considered by the High Court at all. Para 6 of the impugned order is reproduced as under :- "6. Be that as it may, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the matter pending and as such, learned court concerned is hereby directed to expedite and finalize the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1570 of 2018 (Viay Pal Singh Vs. Khushwinder Singh and 3 others), under Section 506 IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Sector - 20, Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 12 months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order before him without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties." 8. We have been informed that the Licence of the complainant has been cancelled. In any case, we have absolutely no doubt in our mind that the complaint itself was filed only to abuse the process of law and in our considered view, it should have been taken more earnestly than how it has been taken by the High Court, which has not considered the seriousness of the matter at all and has dismissed the appeal merely for the reason that it will serve no purpose in keeping the matter pending. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, we have absolutely no doubt that it is a clear abuse of the process of law and the matter calls for our interference. 9. In view of above, the impugned judgment of the High Court is hereby set aside and the proceedings in Complaint Case No. 1570 of 2018 pending in the Court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gautam Budh Nagar are hereby quashed. 10. The appeal is allowed in the above terms. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, is/are disposed of.