Satendra Kumar And Three Others vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another

Ashish Naithani, J

By means of the present C-482 application, applicants have put to challenge the FI R dated 15.10.2019, charge-sheet dated 17.12.2019 and Special Sessions Trial No. 02 of 2020 (Case Crime No. 593 of 2019), under Sections 323, 504, 506, 427 I PC and Section 3(1) (Da) (Dha) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as (“SC/ ST Act”), “State Vs. Satendra Kumar and Others”, pending in the Court of District and Sessions Judge, Haridwar.

Brief facts of the case are that respondent no. 2 lodged an FI R with the averments that he has a shop, named as Shri Balaji Cement and Sanitary Store which is situated at GT Road, Manglaur. I n the morning at about 9.30, when his brother-in-law- namely, Billu Arya opened the shop, present applicants along with some 10-12 unknown persons cam e to his shop and began to hurl fill the abuses; they also used caste indicative words with a further threat to kill. The accused were arm ed with sharp edged weapons by which they sabotaged the shop of respondent no. 2 and also took away Rs. 11,300/ - and other valuable articles.

After investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted by the police against the applicants on 17.12.2019. Since it was a case related to SC/ ST Act, the learned Sessions Judge took cognizance on chargesheet and summoned the applicants on 09.01.2020 to face the trial.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have falsely been implicated in the instant case and they had no intention to commit the alleged offences. He also submits that the instant case has been registered against the applicants just to exert pressure upon them to settle the civil litigation, which is pending between the parties.

Per contra, learned State Counsel submits that there is credible and cogent evidence available against the applicants. He also submits that the Court below after appreciating the evidence available on record has rightly summoned the accused-applicants.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

After perusal of the records, it is evident that at this juncture that it is a matter related to cross case wherein the criminal litigation has been launched by the parties against each other.

At this stage, what this Court could gather is that there is civil litigation regarding the property pending between the parties. Applicants claim their ownership over the said property and at the same time, respondent no. 2/ inform ant in this case has also claim ed title over the said property. I t is also an admitted case that the parties have also filed civil suits against each other.

The question as to which of the parties is in actual possession over the subject property and who is its true owner, can only be examined and decided by a Competent Court having jurisdiction over the same. This Court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not supposed to examine the disputed questions of facts, alleged by the parties against each other. This case also requires to be adjudicated in light of the provisions enunciated in the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 .

Moreover, in the cross cases between the parties, it is also to be seen as to who is the aggressor which too is a matter to be gone into after perusing the evidence of the parties which can only be done before the Competent Trial Court.

Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am of the considered view that there is no merit in this C-482 Application and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. Interim order dated 07.01.2021 granted by this Court, is hereby vacated.

Since the matter in question relates to the year 2018-19, the trial Court is directed to proceed ahead with the trial expeditiously.