# Mukund Singh & Ors v. State of U.P. & Anr

- **Citation:** (2023) 7 ILRA 451
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2023-03-16
- **Case number:** Criminal Appeal No. 1290 of 2023
- **Bench:** Gajendra Kumar
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/mukund-singh-ors-v-state-of-u-p-anr-50358
- **Pages:** 10

## Headnote

Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code,1860 -
Sections 323, 504, 506 & 325 - Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Sections 14-A,
3(1)(r), (s) - Constitution of India, 1950 -
Article 142 - Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 - Section 320 - In instant case,
setting aside of impugned order has been
prayed for on basis of compromise - In
compromise, incident alleged to have
transpired, based on which FIR registered,
not contested rather admitted that quarrel
had ensued between parties that led to
institution
of
instant
proceedings
-
Conflict was that informant side not doing
their job instead taking away tractortrolly to upload bricks, they were abused,
beaten and threatened on their caste
indicative
words
by
appellants

-
Contention by appellants that both parties
known to each other and are neighbours,
due to some misunderstanding quarrel
took place between them, no intention to
hurt
informant,
complainant
amicably
settled disputes with appellants vide
compromise-cum-settlement, out of his
own free will, without coercion. (Para 3, 4,
12, 27)

Held, offence preceded by criminal intent
of humiliating victim on basis of his caste
and committed solely on account of caste
of victim - Compromise does not indicate
settlement
of
any
civil
dispute
and
possibility of informant side being coerced
to enter into compromise cannot be ruled
out as appellant No.2 has criminal history
of two cases and appellant no.4 has
criminal history of 14 case - No rationale
as
to
why
continuation
of
legal
452 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
proceedings would be abuse of process of
law - No provision for compounding
offences under said Act. (Para 29, 30, 32)

Appeal dismissed. (E-13)

List of Cases cited:

## Text

7 All. Mukund Singh & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
451
shall be open for the trial court to treat it as
abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in
accordance with law.

(v) The appellant shall remain present
before the trial court on each date fixed,
either personally or through his counsel. In
case of his absence, the trial court may
proceed against him under Section 229-A
of the Indian Penal Code.

(vi) In case, the appellant misuses the
liberty of bail during trial, in order to
secure his presence, proclamation under
section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the
appellant fails to appear before the court on
the date fixed in such proclamation, then,
the trial court shall initiate proceedings
against him, in accordance with law, under
Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(vii) The appellant shall remain
present, before the trial court on the dates
fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii)
framing of charge and (iii) recording of
statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in
the opinion of the trial court absence of the
appellant is deliberate or without sufficient
cause, then it shall be open for the trial
court to treat such default as abuse of
liberty of bail and proceed against him in
accordance with law.

24. The trial court is also directed to
expedite the trial of the aforesaid case,
within a period of one year from today, by
following the provisions of Section 309
Cr.P.C., strictly without granting any
unnecessary adjournments to the parties, in
case there is no other legal impediment.
----------
(2023) 7 ILRA 451
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 16.03.2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE GAJENDRA KUMAR, J.
Criminal Appeal No. 1290 of 2023

Mukund Singh & Ors. ...Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Appellants:
Sri Jaysingh Yadav

Counsel for the Respondents:
G.A., Sri Ashutosh Kumar Tiwari

Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code,1860 -
Sections 323, 504, 506 & 325 - Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Sections 14-A,
3(1)(r), (s) - Constitution of India, 1950 -
Article 142 - Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 - Section 320 - In instant case,
setting aside of impugned order has been
prayed for on basis of compromise - In
compromise, incident alleged to have
transpired, based on which FIR registered,
not contested rather admitted that quarrel
had ensued between parties that led to
institution
of
instant
proceedings
-
Conflict was that informant side not doing
their job instead taking away tractortrolly to upload bricks, they were abused,
beaten and threatened on their caste
indicative
words
by
appellants

-
Contention by appellants that both parties
known to each other and are neighbours,
due to some misunderstanding quarrel
took place between them, no intention to
hurt
informant,
complainant
amicably
settled disputes with appellants vide
compromise-cum-settlement, out of his
own free will, without coercion. (Para 3, 4,
12, 27)

Held, offence preceded by criminal intent
of humiliating victim on basis of his caste
and committed solely on account of caste
of victim - Compromise does not indicate
settlement
of
any
civil
dispute
and
possibility of informant side being coerced
to enter into compromise cannot be ruled
out as appellant No.2 has criminal history
of two cases and appellant no.4 has
criminal history of 14 case - No rationale
as
to
why
continuation
of
legal
452 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
proceedings would be abuse of process of
law - No provision for compounding
offences under said Act. (Para 29, 30, 32)

Appeal dismissed. (E-13)

List of Cases cited:

1. Ramawatar Vs St. of M.P. (Criminal Appeal
No. 1393 of 2011), dated 25.10.2021

2. Hitesh Verma Vs St. of Uttarakhand, (2020)
10 SCC 710, (Para 10)

3. Prathvi Raj Chauhan Vs U.O.I., (2020) 4 SCC
727

4. Ramgopal & Anr Vs The St. of M.P. (Criminal
Appeal No. 1489 of 2012), dated 29.09.2021,
(Para 11, 19)

(Delivered by Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar, J.)

1. The present Criminal Appeal has
been filed under Section 14-A (1) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
(hereinafter referred to as the "SC/ST Act")
on behalf of the appellants praying for
setting
aside
impugned
order
dated
16.01.2023 passed by ADJ/Spl Judge SC
and ST, Lalitpur in S.S.T.No.260/2018
(State vs Jandail Singh and others ) arising
out of case crime No.41 of 2018 u/s
323,504,506,325 IPC and 3(1)(r),(s) of
ST/ST Act PS-Jakhlaun, District Lalitpur.

2. As per the FIR, the prosecution
story is as follows:

The
First
Informant
Puran
s/o
Kanchhedi Ahirwar was a resident of
Village Nunawali. On 10.04.2018, at about
08 a.m., when he (informant) along with
his father Kanchhedi, brothers Tilak and
Ajay and Bhadai s/o Punu Ahirwar was
going on his tractor-trolly to upload the
bricks, on the way, appellants and other coaccused persons, namely, Jaidan Singh s/o
Lakhan Singh, Mukund singh s/o Lakhan
singh, Bablu s/o Sammar Singh and Lakhan
Singh s/o Dev Singh Thakur, who are
residents
of
Village-Nunawali,
had
intercepted,
insulted,
intimidated
and
abused them by using caste indicative
words, were saying that why are you going
to upload the bricks and why you do not
not go to do our job. Thereafter, with
common intention, they beat them with
kicks, fists & sticks and after threatening
them, they ran away from the spot, as a
result,
complainant/informant's
side
sustained grievous injuries and, thereafter
treatment were given to them at District
hospital, Lalitpur, fromwhere looking to the
seriousness
of
the
victims
namely,
Kanchhedi and Tilak were referred to
Jhansi
Medical
College
and
given
treatment. When they returned their home,
lodged the instant FIR bearing No.0041 of
2018, under Sections 323,504,506,325 IPC
and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of ST/ST Act PS
Jakhlaun, District Lalitpur.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the appellants submitted that the appellants
and Complainant/Respondent No. 2 are
known to each other and are neighbours. It is
submitted that due to some misunderstanding
the quarrel took place between them,
however, there was no intention to hurt the
respondent No.2 (first informant).

4. Learned counsel further submitted
that in the present case, the respondent No. 2
has
amicably
settled
all
his
grievances/disputes and differences with the
appellants vide compromise-cum-settlement,
out of his own free will and without any
coercion.

5. While buttressing his arguments,
learned counsel has also placed reliance on
7 All. Mukund Singh & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
453
the judgment of Hon"ble Supreme Court
passed in Ramawatar v. State of Madhya
Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No. 1393 of
2011) dated 25.10.2021, which has been
dealt with subsequently.

6. Learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the first informant/respondent
No.2 has stated that he has no objection,
whatsoever to the settlement deed, the
complainant has willfully entered into the
said compromise, as such, the impugned
order and present criminal proceedings be
quashed
on
the
basis
of
the
said
compromise.

7. Per Contra, learned AGA appearing
on behalf of the State vehemently opposed
the instant Criminal Appeal and submitted
that: The SC/ST Act is a special legislation
passed to check and deter crimes against
scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. The
legislative intent to implement a specialized
law has been to curb the incidents of
indignities, humiliation and harassment
meted out to the members of these
communities. The present FIR is a classic
case of mischief sought to be criminalized
by this special statute, where accused
persons tried to bully the First Informant
side just on the basis of their caste. In the
instant
case,
the
appellants
have
intentionally terrorized and humiliated the
first informant's side in pursuance of doing
their work. The criminal offences of such
grave nature cannot be compounded on the
basis of settlement between the parties,
otherwise if quashing is allowed on the
basis of compromise, it would send a
wrong message in the society; that the case
of Ramawatar (supra), is on a different
footing altogether wherein the civil dispute
led to the altercation and the said judgment
was passed by the Hon"ble Supreme Court
in exercise of its powers under Article 142
of the Constitution, is distinguishable from
the facts at hand and hence, is not binding
to the instant case.

8. Heard learned counsels appearing
on behalf of parties at length and perused
the record.

9. The Appellants by way of the
instant Criminal Appeal have prayed that
the impugned order be quashed based on
compromise and no other averments as to
the merits of the case have been made.
Thus, the task before the Court is limited to
the extent of adjudicating that - whether in
the facts of this case, the impugned order
and the criminal proceedings under the
SC/ST Act can be quashed on the basis of
compromise between the parties.

10. Before scrutinizing the facts of the
present case and analyzing the powers
exercisable by the High Court under
Section 14 -A (1) of SC/ST Act, it is
pertinent to refer to and analyse the
mandate of Section 320 of the Cr.P.C.

"320. Compounding of offences.--

(1) The offences punishable under the
sections of the Indian Penal Code (45 of
1860) specified in the first two columns of
the
Table
next
following
may
be
compounded by the persons mentioned in
the third column of that Table:...

(2) The offences punishable under the
sections of the Indian Penal Code (45 of
1860) specified in the first two columns of
the Table next following may, with the
permission of the Court before which any
prosecution for such offence is pending, be
compounded by the persons mentioned in
the third column of that Table:...

(3) When an offence is compoundable
under this section, the abetment of such
offence or an attempt to commit such
454 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
offence (when such attempt is itself an
offence) or where the accused is liable
under section 34 or 149 of the Indian Penal
Code (45 of 1860) may be compounded in
like manner.

(4) (a) When the person who would
otherwise be competent to compound an
offence under this section is under the age
of eighteen years or is an idiot or a lunatic,
any person competent to contract on his
behalf may, with the permission of the
Court, compound such offence. (b) When
the person who would otherwise be
competent to compound an offence under
this
section
is
dead,
the
legal
representative, as defined in the Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) of such
person may, with the consent of the Court,
compound such offence.

(5) When the accused has been
committed for trial or when he has been
convicted and an appeal is pending, no
composition for the offence shall be allowed
without the leave of the Court to which he is
committed, or, as the case may be, before
which the appeal is to be heard.

(6) A High Court or Court of Session
acting in the exercise of its powers of revision
under section 401 may allow any person to
compound any offence which such person is
competent to compound under this section.

(7) No offence shall be compounded if
the accused is, by reason of a previous
conviction,
liable
either
to
enhanced
punishment or to a punishment of a different
kind for such offence.

(8) The composition of an offence under
this section shall have the effect of an
acquittal of the accused with whom the
offence has been compounded.

(9) No offence shall be compounded
except as provided by this section."

11. On a bare perusal of sub-Section
(9) of Section 320 of Cr.P.C, it is evident
that
offences
which
are
"noncompoundable" cannot be compounded by
a Criminal Court. Any such attempt by the
Court would amount to alteration, addition,
and modification of Section 320 of Cr.P.C,
which is the exclusive domain of the
legislature. However, the High Court, in
exercise of its inherent powers under
Section 482 of Cr.P.C., keeping in view the
peculiar facts and circumstances of case
and for justifiable reasons, can quash the
criminal proceedings to prevent abuse of
the process of any Court and/or to secure
the ends of justice.

12. In the instant case, setting aside of
impugned order and quashing has been
prayed for on the basis of compromise. In
the said compromise, the factum of the
incident alleged to have transpired, based
on which the instant FIR has been
registered, has not been contested rather it
has been admitted that a quarrel had ensued
between the parties that led to the
institution of the instant proceedings.
Considering
the
same,
there
is
no
requirement of entering into the merits of
the case. Hence, the question of any abuse
of process does not arise.

13. Since, quashing of the Criminal
Proceedings wherein the offence has been
stated to be committed under Section
3(1)(r) and (3)(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act is in
question, it is pertinent to refer to the
legislative
intent
behind
the
said
legislation. The intent can be gauged from
the Statement of Objects and Reasons of
the Act, which is mentioned hereunder:

"Statement
of
Objects
and
Reasons.--Despite various measures to
improve the socio-economic conditions of
the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled
Tribes, they remain vulnerable. They are
7 All. Mukund Singh & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
455
denied number of civil rights. They are
subjected to various offences, indignities,
humiliations and harassment. They have, in
several brutal incidents, been deprived of
their life and property. Serious crimes are
committed
against
them
for
various
historical, social and economic reasons. 2.
Because of the awareness created amongst
the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled
Tribes through spread of education, etc.
they are trying to assert their rights and
this is not being taken very kindly by the
others. When they assert their rights and
resist practices of untouchability against
them or demand statutory minimum wages
or refuse to do any bonded and forced
labour, the vested interests try to cow them
down and terrorise them. When the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes
try to preserve their self-respect or honour
of their women, they become irritants for
the dominant and the mighty. Occupation
and cultivation of even the Government
allotted land by the Scheduled Castes and
the Scheduled Tribes is resented and more
often these people become victims of
attacks by the vested interests. Of late,
there has been an increase in the
disturbing trend of commission of certain
atrocities like making the Scheduled
Castes persons eat inedible substances
like human excreta and attacks on and
mass killings of helpless Scheduled
Castes and the Scheduled Tribes and
rape
of
women
belonging
to
the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled
Tribes. Under the circumstances, the
existing laws like the Protection of Civil
Rights
Act,
1955
and
the
normal
provisions of the Penal Code, 1860 have
been found to be inadequate to check
these crimes. A special legislation to
check and deter crimes against them
committed by non-Scheduled Castes and
non-Scheduled Tribes has, therefore,
become necessary."

14. The legislative intent has also
been referred to by the Hon"ble Supreme
Court in the case of Hitesh Verma v. State
of Uttarakhand, (2020) 10 SCC 710,
wherein the Hon"ble Court held as under:

"10. The Act was enacted to improve
the social economic conditions of the
vulnerable sections of the society as they
have been subjected to various offences
such as 11 indignities, humiliations and
harassment. They have been deprived of
life and property as well. The object of
the Act is thus to punish the violators
who inflict indignities, humiliations and
harassment and commit the offence as
defined under Section 3 of the Act. The
Act is thus intended to punish the acts
of
the
upper
caste
against
the
vulnerable section of the society for the
reason that they belong to a particular
community."

15. The long title of the Act makes it
evident that the Act is intended to prevent
the commission of offences of atrocities
against the members of the Scheduled
Castes
and
the
Scheduled
Tribes
communities to provide for Special Courts
and Exclusive Special Courts for the trial of
such offences and for ensuring relief and
rehabilitation of the victims of such
offences. The object of the Act is to
improve the socio-economic conditions of
the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled
Tribes as they are denied their civil rights.
Thus, an offence under the Act would be
made out whenever a member of the
vulnerable section of the society is
subjected to indignities, humiliations, and
harassment.
456 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

16. The founding fathers of the
Constitution were conscious of the harsh
realities
of
the
society
and
the
discrimination that the members of the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes
have been subjected to. At the time of
independence, the lofty ideals of liberty,
equality and fraternity were just utopian
principles that were although guaranteed by
law, but not present on ground. It was for
the welfare of the downtrodden and
vulnerable
that
the
ameliorative
and
remedial measures were brought in to
ensure that their civil rights are protected
and equality in principle is adopted in
practice.

17. One of the objectives of the
Preamble of Constitution is "fraternity
assuring the dignity of the individual and
the unity and integrity of the nation". The
Preamble did not originally contain the
expression
"fraternity"
rather
it
was
subsequently inserted by the Drafting
Committee. It is relevant to refer to the
explanation given by Dr. Bhimrao Ramji
Ambedkar
for
the
word
"fraternity"
wherein he stated that "fraternity means a
sense of common brotherhood of all
Indians". In a country like ours with the
vivid diversity and the plethora of fault
lines, it is necessary to emphasise and reemphasize that the unity and integrity of
India can be preserved only by a spirit of
brotherhood.

18. As stated by the Hon"ble Supreme
Court in Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of
India, (2020) 4 SCC 727, to achieve this
ideal of fraternity, three provisions namely -
Articles 15, 17 and 24 were included in the
Constitution
of
India.
Despite
these
provisions being in place, the founding
fathers of the Constitution expected the
Legislature to enact effective measures to
root out the caste-based discrimination in the
society. First attempt by the Parliament to
achieve that end was the enactment of the
Untouchability (Offences) Act, 1955 wherein
the burden of proof was fixed on the accused
and not on the prosecution. Next came the
Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955, that
made provisions for outlawing and penalising
the
social
practices
associated
with
untouchability and disabilities. Subsequently,
it was felt that the 1955 Act (which was
amended in 1976) did not provide for
sufficient deterrence to the 12 caste-based
discriminatory
practices
against
the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
communities.

19. Finally, to plug in the loophole, and
to ensure the rights which the Constitution
has guaranteed to the people, the Scheduled
Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act, 1989 was enacted to
prevent the commission of atrocities against
members of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, to
provide for Special Courts for the trial of
such offences and for the relief and
rehabilitation of the victims of such offences.
The Act has also for the first time laid down
an expansive definition of "atrocity" to cover
the multiple manners through which the
members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes have been humiliated, oppressed and
downtrodden for centuries.

20. In light of the aforesaid, it is
important to reiterate that unless the
provisions of the Act are enforced in their
true letter and spirit, and the legislative
intent underlying the Act is manifested, the
vision of a society free of caste-based
discrimination will only remain a distant
dream.

21. Learned counsel for the petitioner
has extensively placed reliance on the
7 All. Mukund Singh & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
457
judgment of the Hon"ble Supreme Court in
Ramawatar (supra), and hence it is crucial
to analyse the same at length.

22. The Hon"ble Supreme Court
while deciding the said Appeal was faced
with two questions, first whether the
jurisdiction of the Hon"ble Supreme Court
under Article 142 of the Constitution can
be invoked for quashing of criminal
proceedings
arising
out
of
a
non
compoundable offence; and if the answer to
the first question is in affirmative, second
whether the power to quash proceedings
can be extended to offences arising out of
special statutes such as the SC/ST Act.

23. In response to the first question,
the Hon"ble Supreme Court reiterated the
finding of Ramgopal & Anr v. The State
of Madhya Pradesh (Criminal Appeal
No. 1489 of 2012) dated 29.09.2021, and
while holding that Section 320 of Cr.P.C.
cannot be construed as a bar on invocation
of the inherent powers vested in the Court
also held that the touchstone for exercise of
the
extra-ordinary
powers
under
the
inherent jurisdiction would be to do
complete justice. The Hon"ble Supreme
Court reiterated the note of caution, that the
Court must take into consideration while
exercising the powers under the provisions,
and held:

"11. The Court in Ramgopal (Supra)
further
postulated
that
criminal
proceedings involving non heinous offences
or offences which are predominantly of a
private nature, could be set aside at any
stage of the proceedings, including at the
appellate level. The Court, however, being
conscious of the fact that unscrupulous
offenders may attempt to escape their
criminal
liabilities
by
securing
a
compromise through brute force, threats,
bribes, or other such unethical and illegal
means, cautioned that in cases where a
settlement is struck post conviction, the
Courts should, inter alia, carefully examine
the fashion in which the compromise has
been arrived at, as well as, the conduct of
the accused before and after the incident in
question. While concluding, the Court also
formulated certain guidelines and held:
19... Nonetheless, we reiterate that such
powers of wide amplitude ought to be
exercised carefully in the context of
quashing criminal proceedings, bearing in
mind: (i) Nature and effect of the offence
on the conscious of the society; (ii)
Seriousness of the injury, if any; (iii)
Voluntary nature of compromise between
the accused and the victim; & (iv) Conduct
of the accused persons, prior to and after
the occurrence of the purported offence
and/or other relevant considerations."

24. As regards the second question
the Hon"ble Supreme Court in the said
judgment has observed as under:

"15. Ordinarily, when dealing with
offences arising out of special statutes such
as the SC/ST Act, the Court will be
extremely circumspect in its approach. The
SC/ST Act has been specifically enacted to
deter acts of indignity, humiliation and
harassment against members of Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The Act is
also a recognition of the depressing reality
that despite undertaking several measures,
the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes to
be subjected to various atrocities at the
hands of upper castes. The Courts have to
be mindful of the fact that the Act has been
enacted keeping in view the express
constitutional safeguards enumerated in
Articles 15, 17 and 21 of the Constitution,
with a twin fold objective of protecting the
members of these vulnerable communities
458 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
as
well
as
to
provide
relief
and
rehabilitation to the victims of caste based
atrocities.

18. We may hasten to add that in
cases such as the present, the Courts ought
to be even more vigilant to ensure that the
complainant victim has entered into the
compromise on the volition of his/her free
will and not on account of any duress. It
cannot be understated that since members
of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled
Tribe belong to the weaker sections of our
country, they are more prone to acts of
coercion, and therefore ought to be
accorded a higher level of protection. If the
Courts find even a hint of compulsion or
force, no relief can be given to the accused
party. What factors the Courts should
consider, would depend on the facts and
circumstances of each case."

25. The Hon"ble Supreme Court in
the said judgment as regards the second
question further held that:

"16. On the other hand, where it
appears to the Court that the offence in
question, although covered under the
SC/ST Act, is primarily private or civil in
nature, or where the alleged offence has
not been committed on account of the caste
of the victim, or where the continuation of
the legal proceedings would be an abuse of
the process of law, the Court can exercise
its powers to quash the proceedings. On
similar lines, when considering a prayer
for
quashing
on
the
basis
of
a
compromise/settlement, if the Court is
satisfied that the underlying objective of the
Act
would
not
be
contravened
or
diminished even if the felony in question
goes unpunished, the mere fact that the
offence is covered under a ̳special statute'
would not refrain this Court or the High
Court, from exercising their respective
powers
under
Article
142
of
the
Constitution or Section 482 Cr.P.C. is held
that whether has held that though offences
under the SC/ST Act can be quashed if the
offence is primarily private or civil in
nature, however, before quashing, the
Court must be satisfied that the victim has
not been put under pressure to enter into
the settlement. Having considered the
peculiar facts and circumstances of the
present case in light of the afore stated
principles, as well as having meditated on
the application for compromise, we are
inclined to invoke the powers under Article
142 and quash the instant Criminal
proceedings with the sole objective of
doing complete justice between the parties
before us...."

26. Upon a detailed deliberation on
the question of quashing of criminal
proceedings in offences under the SC/ST
Act and in light of the judgments discussed
herein above, the following principles
emerge:

(i) While dealing with the quashing of
the criminal proceedings under the SC/ST
Act, the Court should be extremely
circumspect in its approach and cognizant
of the legislative intent of the said Act.

(ii) In cases involving the offences
under special legislations like the SC/ST
Act, while considering the quashing of
criminal
proceedings,
the
social
discrimination
that
prevails
and
the
vulnerability of the weaker sections of the
society as being prone to coercion, the
Court should be more vigilant to ensure
that the victim has entered into the
compromise on one"s own volition and free
will and not on account of any duress. If,
while considering the same, there is an iota
of apprehension of compulsion or coercion,
no relief can be given to the accused. The
7 All. Mukund Singh & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
459
factors to determine the volition/free
consent of the victim would depend on the
facts and circumstances and would vary
from case to case.

(iii) Upon the aforesaid analysis, in the
opinion of the Court, it is found that:

first, if the offence although covered
under the SC/ST Act is primarily private or
civil in nature; or,

second, where the offence has not
been committed on account of the caste of
the victim; or,

third, where the continuation of the
legal proceedings would be an abuse of
process of law; and,

fourth, if the underlying objective of
the Act would not be contravened or
diminished even if the felony in question
goes unpunished, then the mere fact that
the offence is covered under a "special
statute" would not be a bar on the exercise
of the inherent jurisdiction, and the Court
can exercise its powers to quash the
proceedings.

26. This Court has considered the
case at hand, the case laws and principles
of law referred above and specifically the
judgment of the Hon"ble Supreme Court in
Ramawatar (supra). What emerges is that
when dealing with offences arising out of
special statutes such as the SC/ST Act, the
Court should be extremely circumspect in
exercising its extraordinary jurisdiction to
quash the criminal proceedings.

27. In the Ramawatar's case (supra),
there was a pre-existing property dispute
between the parties which led to the
conflict and the said turn of events which
led to the initiation of criminal proceedings
under SC/ST Act. However, in the instant
case the root of conflict was that First
Informant side was not doing their job
instead taking away the tractor-trolly to
upload bricks and they were abused, beaten
and threatened on their caste lines by the
appellants.

28. Further, in light of the peculiar
facts and circumstances of the Ramawatar's
case (Supra), the powers were exercised by
the Hon"ble Supreme Court under Article
142 to quash the criminal proceedings with
the sole objective of doing complete justice
between the parties before it. However, in
this case there is neither any cogent reason
nor any travesty of justice being caused or
any abuse of process that needs to be
prevented thus warranting the exercise of
the inherent jurisdiction of this Court.

29. In the instant case, what appears is
that the humiliation of the Victim/First
Informant side was totally unprovoked,
uncalled for, with the sole intention of
humiliating the victim for not doing their
job. The offence in the instant case was
preceded
by
a
criminal
intent
of
humiliating the victim on the basis of his
caste and has been committed solely and
consciously on account of the caste of the
victim.

30. Furthermore, having regard to the
legislative intent underlying the SC/ST Act
to deter the acts of indignity, humiliation,
and harassment against members of the
Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes, and
the
facts
in
the
instant
case,
the
compromise
does
not
indicate
the
settlement of any civil dispute and the
possibility of the First Informant side being
coerced to enter into the compromise
cannot be ruled out as appellant No.2
Lakhan Singh has criminal history of two
cases and appellant no.4 Jandail Singh has
criminal history of 14 case, which is
evident from para 19 of the criminal
appeal. There is no rationale as to why the
460 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
continuation of the legal proceedings would
be an abuse of process of law.

31. Therefore, the offence in the instant
case being not of a pre-dominantly civil
nature and being committed solely on the
basis of caste of victim, the rigours of SC/ST
Act being a Special statute, enacted with a
specific noble legislative intent that must be
given effect in its letter and spirit, cannot be
diluted by quashing the Criminal Proceedings
in question on the basis of compromise. Thus,
in the instant case, a case for exercise of
extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482
of the Code of Criminal Procedure is not
made out, as in this case a Criminal Appeal
has been filed under S.14-A (1) SC/ST Act,
which reads as follows:-

"14-A(1) Notwithstanding anything
contained in the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), an appeal
shall lie, from any judgment, sentence or
order, not being an interlocutory order, of
a Special Court or an Exclusive Special
Court, to the High Court both on facts and
on law."

32. In the Scheme of SC/ST Act,
there is no provision for compounding the
offences under the Act.

33. In the light of the analysis made
above and as appellants have failed to point
out any illegality, infirmity or perversity in
the impugned order dated 16.01.2023, I am
of the view that Appeal being devoid of
merits which is liable to be dismissed and
is, hereby, dismissed.

33. It is made clear that the
observations made herein while dismissing
the instant Criminal Appeal shall have no
bearing whatsoever on the merits of the
case during trial.
----------
(2023) 7 ILRA 460
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 14.07.2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE SHAMIM AHMED, J.

Criminal Appeal No. 1745 of 2021

Satyam Singh ...Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Appellant:
Ramakar Shukla, Ravi Kant Pandey

Counsel for the Respondents:
G.A., Alok Srivastava

Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code,1860 -
Sections 306 & 376(2) - Abatement to
suicide - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
- Section 3(2)(V) - I. T Act, 2000 - Section
67 - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article
21 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 -
Section 161 - Appeal against rejection of
bail - Allegation against appellant that he
harassed
wife
and
daughter
of
complainant's brother and they committed
suicide
-
Appellant
submitted
that
complainant's entire St.ment was based
on suspicion - Cause of death of deceased
was unknown, due to property dispute
both were killed by their family members -
Circumstantial evidence, no independent
eye witness - Chain of circumstances not
complete. (Para 7, 8, 12, 15, 21)

Held, none of villagers or any independent
person had seen viral video clip or
photograph of appellant and deceased nor
any complaint was made by police that
some video or photograph were taken by
appellant on his mobile phone and on that
basis he threatened her - Husband of
deceased St.d he received video clip from
appellant which after seeing it he deleted,
but he had not informed this to police,