Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Rama Kant Rai & Others v. State Of U.P. - APPLICATION U/s 482 No. 3029 of 2001 [2006] RD-AH 11203 (10 July 2006)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).



Criminal Misc. Application No. 3029 of 2001

Rama Kant Rai & 3 others.......Accused/Applicants


State of U.P. & another...........Opposite Parties

Hon. K.N. Sinha, J.

By means of the present Criminal Misc. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants have sought quashing of charge sheet in case No. 3504/2000 (State vs. Shiv Bahadur and others) under Sections 427/506/504 IPC and section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and The Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

The brief facts, as set forth in the F.I.R., are that Rampreet is dhobi by caste and on 8.1.2000 at about 5.30 P.M., the applicants collected and started erecting wall on the land of opposite party no.2.  When he obstructed, they damaged the wall of opposite party no.2 and threatened for life.

The prayer for quashing has been made on the ground that the allegations are based only on oral averment, having no documentary support and opposite party no.2 has taken the benefit of being a scheduled caste.  Even on the basis of the F.I.R., no allegation is made out regarding committing of any atrocity on opposite party no.2.  There are three witnesses of fact including the opposite party no.2, whose statements have been marked as Annexure no. 3A, 3B and 3C.  They are the family members of the opposite party no.2 and there is no independent witness.  In fact the opposite party no.2, in order to grab the Sahan land of the applicants, made undue effort.  In this connection a non-cognizable report dated 1.2.2000 was lodged by applicant no.4 along with the injury report which is Annexure 5A and 5B.  The applicants have also filed a suit no.413/2000 Shiv Bahadur Yadav vs. Sukhram and obtained stay order, which is in force till now.  Applicant no.2 being head of the family, has also given an application to the police about the evil design of opposite party no.2.  Not only this, applicant no.1 is a government servant and posted as Inspector of Works in Railways and at the time of incident he was on duty at Daltonganj, Bihar.  The certificate by the Section Engineer, Eastern Railway, Daltonganj, Bihar was issued and given to investigating officer but the investigating officer did not incorporate it in the case diary. The true copy of the said certificate is Annexure No.7.  Applicant No.2 is also a Lekhpal and he was also on duty as per the certificate (Annexure No.8).

A supplementary affidavit has also been filed and copy of the plaint of suit no.413/2000 and order passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) is Annexure SA-1 and SA-2 on record. No counter affidavit has been filed from the other side.

I have heard the learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. and Sri Ramesh Rai learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. I have perused the record and the affidavit.

The supplementary affidavit contains copy of the plaint as SA-1.  This plaint shows that there is litigation between Shiv Bahadur Rai and others and Sukhram and another.  In the said plaint Kamala Rai was plaintiff no.4, whose three sons Rama Kant Rai, Bhaskar Rai and Sudhakar Rai are applicant no.1, 2 and 3 whereas Sukhram father of opposite party no.2 is one of the defendants in the said suit.  The land of the said case has shown in the plaint map and Civil Judge (Junior Division) has directed the parties to maintain status quo.  In the said backdrop of the case, the contention of the opposite party no.2 is falsified.

So far as the atrocities to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe is concerned, the contents of the F.I.R. and the statement of witnesses as available on record as Annexure 3A, 3B and 3C, which do not show that any act was committed with the intention to commit atrocities on the ground that opposite party no.2 is a scheduled caste. The object and reasons for enacting the Act no.33/1989 was to prevent the atrocities on the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe. The FIR or the statement does not contain even the name of caste nor anything has been done on account of opposite party no.2 being of Scheduled Caste. The certificates (Annexure 7 and Annexure 8) were given no weight, whereas it was submitted to the Circle Officer with affidavit.  No counter affidavit has been filed.  All the averments of the petition are uncontroverted and unrebutted.

It appears that it is purely a matter of civil nature and suit is pending in the civil court and the right of parties can be decided there. The allegations are that applicants were armed with danda and pistol but there is no injury at all.

Thus, in view of above facts, no case against the applicants is made out.  The application under section 482 Cr.P.C. is liable to be allowed and it is hereby allowed.  The proceedings of the case no. 3504/2000 State vs. under sections 427,506 and 504 IPC and section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and The Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, are hereby quashed.  




Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.