Sami Ullah And Others v. State Of U.P. And Another

Ram Krishna Gautam, J. - This appeal under Section 14-A(1) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed by accused appellants Sami Ullah, Subrati, Akram and Rizwan Ahmad @ Sanauwar against order of summoning passed by Court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, in Criminal Complaint Case No. 4 of 2017; Ashok Kumar Kannaujiya Vs. Sami Ullah and others, vide order dated 05.07.2018.

2. Learned counsel for appellants argued that a Complaint Case No. 4 of 2017, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)X SC/ST Act, P.S. Shohratgarh, District Siddhartha Nagar, was filed before Court of Additional Session / Special Judge, SC/ST Act, District Siddhartha Nagar, in which informant / complainant Ashok Kumar Kannaujiya, who had moved application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for a direction for getting case registered and investigated for occurrence of 11.00 A.M. on 14.04.2016, which was registered as complaint case, was with statement of complainant and two other witnesses, recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., on the basis of which above summoning order was passed, whereas there was no dispute or quarrel in between opposite party no. 2 and appellants. Rather a civil dispute regarding land was in between PW-1, PW-2 and appellants, for which this false case was got registered in the name of complainant / opposite party no. 2. Medical evidence was not in consonance with the oral statement, because Medical Officer has written injury to be of seven days, whereas the medical examination was of the very next day. This duration was not commensurate to alleged date of occurrence. Hence, this summoning was erroneous.

3. Learned counsel for informant / complainant and learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed this appeal.

4. Perusal of application moved under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., which was treated as complaint, reveals that it was presented before Court of District and Sessions Judge, Siddhartha Nagar. Admittedly, District and Sessions Judge, Siddhartha Nagar was not a Special Judge, notified under SC/ST Act nor he was the power of magistrate for exercising jurisdiction under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.. Though, jurisdiction was exercised by Court of Special Judge SC/ST Act, Siddhartha Nagar and the same is the designation given by Court passing summoning order, but from order sheet it is not apparent as to when this application or file was transferred to above Court.

5. Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 mentioned that Siddhartha Nagar being a judgeship of few officers, remains with jurisdiction of District and Sessions Judge for many special Acts, but even in above circumstance, this application, treated to be complaint, is to be addressed and filed in a Court having jurisdiction of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Siddhartha Nagar, may it be Court of District and Sessions Judge or any other Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge. This is a technicality apparent on record, not going to prejudice prosecution, but District and Sessions Judge, Siddhartha Nagar is to ensure that his Additional District Judges should be aware of this fact that application is to be filed before Court having jurisdiction and not to any other Court and in case of filing to any other Court, this ought to be transferred either in judicial side or in administrative side to Court having jurisdiction under special Act.

6. Regarding summoning order, it is apparent that complainant is the member of Scheduled Caste community, for which he has filed his caste certificate and appellants are not of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe community. Assault by appellants over complainant on above date of occurrence i.e. 14.04.2016 at about 11.00 A.M. at the field of Saurabh Yadav, where there was some altercation in between Sami Ullah and others and Saurabh Yadav, regarding some civil dispute, was said, in which name of appellants are there, who gave assault over complainant and it was with specific words used for intimidating, based on his caste of being member of Scheduled Caste community in open public view. When he ran to his home for saving himself, there too he was assaulted. He was medically treated and examined, of which medico legal report is on record. The same is with injuries written in it. The complainant has been instantly examined under Section 200 Cr.P.C., in which his contention is fully intact. These two witnesses Saurabh Yadav and Munnu Yadav have been examined under Section 202 Cr.P.C., in which they have corroborated statement of complainant. The same is with corroboration of medico legal report and on the basis of those evidence, alleged summoning order for offence punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)X SC/ST Act was passed.

7. Apex Court in Fiona Shrikhande vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr., 2014 AIR(SC) 957 has propounded that at the time of summoning under Section 204 Cr.P.C., it is only to be seen whether allegation made in complaint is prima facie sufficient to proceed against accused. There need not to interfere into merits and demerits of case. A prima facie existence of ground for proceeding further against accused is only to be seen at the time of passing of summoning order. A meticulous, analytical, reasoned order is not needed at the time of passing of summoning order, as was propounded by Apex Court in UP Pollution Control Board vs. M/s. Mohan Meakins Ltd. and others, 2000 AIR(SC) 1456.

8. In present case, complainant in his statement recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and his two witnesses, present on spot, PW-1 Saurabh Yadav and PW-2 Munnu Yadav, have been examined by Court under Section 202 Cr.P.C. There is no exaggeration, material contradiction or embellishment in the statement of all those three witnesses. The medical report is also in consonance with above explanation. Injury written in it was found by Medical Officer, who immediately examined injured, of one week, is not against the fact that it was only one day before because one day before is including within one week.

9. Under all above facts and circumstances, summoning order was passed on the basis of material placed on record and it was with no illegality or irregularity, hence appeal merits its dismissal. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.

10. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.