Court No. - 75
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2722 of 2021 Appellant :- Dr. Heera Yadav Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ishan Deo Giri Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA for the State.
From the record, it appears that the file could not come on board on 18.06.2021, therefore, no order could be passed on that date.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that no offence under Section 3(1)(x) S.C./S.T. Act is made out. Trial court has wrongly passed the order to frame the charge under the impugned section of S.C./S.T. Act because the incident did not take place within the public view. Learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. 707 of 2020 (arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 3585 of 2020) (Hitesh Verma vs. State of Uttarakhand and another).
Matter requires consideration. Admit.
Issue notice to complainant / informant / victim returnable at an early date.
List the matter on 08.10.2021 in the additional cause list.
In the meantime, respondents may file objection / counter affidavit if any.
So far as, stay of proceeding in trial court is concerned, it is noteworthy to mention here that applicability of S.C./S.T. Act is challenged in the present appeal, entire proceeding in other Sections is not in question. It is settled law that charge can be amended or altered at any stage of proceeding. If the proceeding pursuant to the impugned order is stayed, entire trial will be held up, therefore, question of stay of the proceeding does not arise.
The appeal shall be heard and decided on merit.
Order Date :- 27.7.2021 Manoj Digitally signed by RAJENDRA KUMAR Date: 2021.07.29 17:53:35 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad