Rajo vs. State Of U.P.

Court No. - 44

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4299 of 2023

Revisionist :- Rajo Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Mohd. Ayyuq Hasan,Atul Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Chandra Shekhar Mishra

Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J.

Rajo-Petitioner has filed this criminal revision to challenge the impugned order dated 12.5.2023 passed by Special Judge SC/ST Act, District Saharanpur in Complaint Case No. 244 of 2023, titled "Rajo Vs. Anurag Dhama and others", whereby, her complaint praying for exercise of jurisdiction under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. has been dismissed.

Learned counsel for revisionist submits that complainant-petitioner in her complaint dated 22.3.2023 submitted before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Saharanpur for registration of an F.I.R., revealed the alleged commission of offences punishable under Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 as well as the fact that the Station House Officer, Gangoh, District Saharanpur is not taking action on her complaint, but no action was taken by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Saharanpur also, therefore, the petitioner was compelled to make a complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the Special Judge SC/ST Act, Saharanpur.

Learned counsel for revisionist has further drawn the attention of the Court to the averments in the complaint, particularly the alleged utterances made by accused and submitted that these constitute the offences punishable under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, but instead of issuing the necessary directions, the Court proceeded to dismiss the complaint vide impugned order dated 12.5.2023. Learned counsel submits that the impugned order dated 12.5.2023 is bad in law, as while refusing to exercise discretion under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., alternatively, no opportunity has been granted to the petitioner to adduce the pre-summoning evidence to make out a prima facie case for issuance of process against the accused persons. According to learned counsel, the impugned order dated 12.5.2023 warrants interference by this Court.

Notice of the petition was issued to the contesting opposite party no.2, but despite service of notice, no one has appeared on his behalf.

After hearing the learned counsel for petitioner and considering the material on record, this Court finds that complaint made by the petitioner on 27.3.2023 before the Special Judge SC/ST Act, Saharanpur, is supported with an affidavit, and further the Special Judge SC/ST Act, Saharanpur had also asked for a report from the police. A perusal of the impugned order dated 12.5.2023 reveals that said report by police is specifically noticed by the Special Court, wherein, it is mentioned that allegations in the complaint made by complainant-petitioner are exaggerated, because of a matrimonial dispute between Monu and Parul, because the said marriage was performed on the basis of the mediation by the complainant-petitioner. The Special Court believed the report by police and refused to exercise the discretion under Section $156(3)$ $Cr.P.C.$

Of course, by now it is settled law that the exercise of powers under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is discretionary in nature and the Court is always justified in exercising such discretion, if, the allegations in the complaint sufficiently disclose the commission of a cognizable offence. In other words, while exercising the powers under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. by a Competent Court, the police is reminded about its statutory duty to take cognizance by registering F.I.R. and carry on investigation in terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C.

As per the impugned order dated 12.5.2023, the Special Court evaluated the complaint, the report by police and refused to exercise the discretion under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., but has not given an opportunity to proceed with the complaint in terms of Chapter XV i.e. under Section 200 Cr.P.C. onwords, therefore, to this extent, the impugned order dated 12.5.2023 is not sustainable.

Consequently, the criminal revision is disposed of with a direction to the Special Judge SC/ST Act, Saharanpur to proceed with the subject complaint in accordance with the procedure contained in Chapter XV Cr.P.C.

Order Date: - 11.10.2023 $P.S.Parihar$