Lokhay Mandal @ Lokhai Mandal vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors

Heard Mr. Avishek Prasad, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant.

Heard Ms. Vipul Divya, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

Heard Mr. Indu Shekhar Gupta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party No.-2.

This appeal has been filed for the following reliefs: -

“That this memo of appeal is being preferred as this appellant is aggrieved vide order dated 22.2.19 passed by learned Additional

Sessions Judge-I-Cum-Special Judge, Dumka passed in connection with SC/ST Case No. 6/2017 arising out of Kathikund P.S. Case No.

87/13, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1666/13 lodged for the alleged commission of offence under Sections 406, 419, 420, 504, 506 of the

Indian Penal Code and Section 3(x) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby an application preferred under Section 227 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure has been rejected by Additional Sessions Judge-I-Cum-Special Judge, Dumka. Pending in the Court of A.S.J-I-

Cum-Spl. Judge, Dumka.â€​

Learned counsel for the appellant while assailing the impugned order dated 22.02.2019 submits that the learned court below has rejected the petition

of the appellant for discharge. He further submits that in the entire allegation and in the case-diary, the place of occurrence of the so-called insult and

intimidation has not been mentioned. Therefore, in view of Section 3(1)(r) of the Schedule Caste & Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,

1989, no case is made out against the appellant. The learned counsel submits that although the aforesaid Act of 1989 has been amended, but the

learned court below has wrongly mentioned the provisions as Section 3(X) of the aforesaid Act of 1989, and now the corresponding Section is Section

3(1)(r) of the Schedule Caste & Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The learned counsel submits that the learned court below has

not applied its judicial mind, so far as the allegation under Section 3(X) (unamended) or corresponding Section 3(1)(r) of the aforesaid Act of 1989 is

concerned. The learned counsel for the appellant has also submitted that so far as the allegations made under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code

is concerned, there is no misappropriation of any amount by the appellant, in as much as, the same has already been refunded to the victims, and

accordingly, the learned court below ought to have discharged the appellant.

The learned counsel submits that so far as the impugned order dated 22.02.2019 passed by the learned court below e-diary, but has not referred to

the materials which have bis concerned, the same only refers to the paragraphs of the caseen collected during investigation to show prima-facie case

against the appellant. The learned counsel further submits that in this view of the matter, the impugned order dated 22.02.2019 be set-aside and the

matter be remitted back to the learned court below for appreciation of the materials which have been collected during investigation with particular

reference to Section 3(X) of the aforesaid Act of 1989.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party No.-2 as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State, on the other hand,

submit that in the First Information Report, it has been mentioned that the informant and others used to visit to the house of the appellant, but the

appellant did not pay the amount and whenever the appellant met, he abused, intimidated and assaulted them. The learned counsel submits that the

points raised by the appellant may not be examined at the stage of discharge.

After hearing the counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court finds that the place of occurrence has

an important bearing in the matter to constitute a prima-facie case under Section 3(1)(r) of the Act of aforesaid Act of 1989.

Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter, this Court finds that the learned court below has only referred to paragraphs in the case-diary and

there is no discussion of the materials which have been collected during investigation.

In the aforesaid view of the matter, the impugned order dated 22.02.2019 passed by the learned court below, is hereby set-aside and the matter is

remitted back to the learned court below for consideration of the materials which have been collected during investigation and for passing a speaking

order.

It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the allegation made in the present case and the learned court below shall pass fresh

order in accordance with law.

Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court below through ‘FAX’.