Title: SHAHSIKANTH SHARMA & ORS V STATE OF UP
Citation: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). OF 2023 (Arising out of SLP(Criminal) No(s). 5323 of 2023)
Dated on: 1.12.2023
Corum: HON’BLE JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA & JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Facts of the case
In the present case the appellants are accused of various offences under IPC and SC/ST Act for allegedly attacking the complainant party during a political rivalry. They challenged the charge framed against them for the offence under Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, which requires the accused to commit an offence against a person of SC/ST community with the knowledge of their identity. The appellants contended that the offence under Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act was not established by the prosecution case, as the only offence punishable by 10 years or more imprisonment under the IPC was the alleged gunshot fired by one of the appellants at Rinku Thakur, who did not belong to the SC/ST community. They further argued that the prosecution case was fraudulent and contrived for political reasons. The respondents rejected the appellants’ request, claiming that the appellants waged a coordinated attack on the complaint party while campaigning for the other political party. They also claimed that the appellants utilized their political clout to influence the inquiry and obstruct the filing of FIR. The respondents relied upon the statement of Virender Singh a member of the SC community who gave a statement that he was abused on the basis of his caste after firing gun shot at Rinu Thakur.
Legal analysis
In this present case the accused was charged with the said sections
Section 147: deals with rioting
Section 148: pertains to rioting while armed with a deadly weapon
Section 149: Every member of an unlawful assembly who is guilty of an offence committed in the prosecution of a common object is covered by this section
Section 307: deals with attempt to murder
Section 323: pertains to voluntarily causing hurt
Section 504: deals with intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace.
The said charges were filed against the appellant by the Special Judge SC/ST(PoA) Act and additionally charged the accused with the changers of Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act).
Section 3(2)(v): This provision specifically addresses offences committed against members of the Scheduled Castes (SC) or Scheduled Tribes (ST) with knowledge of their identity.
In this case, the appellants were accused under this section for allegedly committing an infraction against someone who did not belong to the SC/ST community. The Court examined whether the prosecution had shown the required elements of this offense, including knowledge of the victim’s caste identification.
Court analysis and judgement
In the present case, the Hon’ble SC after looking into the facts and merits of the case and referring into various precedents came to the conclusion that to grant the appeal means that, while the accusations under the SC/ST Act were dismissed, the trial for the other offenses under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) would continue. By releasing the accused on bond, the court enables them to stay free awaiting the conclusion of the trial, providing they meet certain terms imposed by the court. Furthermore, the court quashed non bailable warrants implies that all earlier orders for the accused people’ arrest were nullified, underlining their freedom until the trial is completed. The decision to shift the trial from the Special Court to the Court of Sessions following the quashing of the SC/ST Act charge represents a change in jurisdiction.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Namitha Ramesh
