1 2025:CGHC:7854 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 225 of 2025 1 - Manish Singh @ Pammu Singh S/o Late Ravindra Singh Aged About 45 Years R/o Ward No. 1 Balrampur, P.S.- Balrampur, Distt.- Balrampur- Ramanujganj, C.G. 2 - Basant Singh S/o Late Ravindra Singh Aged About 45 Years R/o Ward No. 1 Balrampur, P.S.- Balrampur, Distt.- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. 3 - Raja Kadari @ Harun S/o Sammersul Aged About 32 Years R/o Ward No. 3 Balrampur, P.S.- Balrampur, Distt.- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. ... Appellant (s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer- Ajjak- Balrampur, Distt.- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. 2 - Dhanuram Chandravanshi S/o Late Krishna Ram Chandravanshi Aged About 42 Years Working On The Post Of Sub Inspector, Posted At Police Station- Balrampur, Distt.- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Appellant(s) : Shri A.N. Pandey, Advocate. For the State : Shri Karan Bahrani, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 13/02/2025 1. Challenge in this criminal appeal under Section 14(A)(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is to the order dated 12/12/2024 passed by the Special Judge NARESH KUMAR KAMDE Digitally signed by NARESH KUMAR KAMDE Date: 2025.03.07 10:27:18 +0530 2 Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Balrampur, Place- Ramanujganj (C.G.) in Special Session Trial (Atrocities) No. 18/2024, framing charges against the appellants under Sections 294, 506 Part-II, 332, 353/34 of Indian Panel Code and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(V-a) Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Atrocities) Act. 2. The facts of the case is that on 15.2.2023 at about 10 p.m in the night, Appellant No.3 was assaulted by the Abhishek Singh, Vikas Singh, Rinku Yadav, Rajesh Soni, Asok Diwedi and other persons on a dispute regarding mutation of the name of some of the parties. Appellant no.3 run away and entered in to the house of Jitendra Shrivastava in order to save himself, however, the accused persons entered into the house of Jitendra Shrivastav. The incident was immediately reported to the police station- Balrampur, Complainant was in charge of P.S- Balrampur, who started trying to that the matter compromised, however, when the complainant and injured persons have not agreed for any settlement, FIR was lodged against the accused persons under the crime no. 07/2023 against the 7 accused persons Though the FIR was registered, however, it was not registered for the actual offices committed by the accused persons, hence, the villagers, the concern police for registration of FIR in appropriate Sections In the said agitation 1000-2000 villagers assembled along with local MLA and have started agitation against the illegal act of the authorities of P.S Balrampur. After two days of agitation, P.S-Balrampur has further added section 452 of I.P.C against the accused persons. Thereafter completing of investigation, police filed the charge sheet against the applicants for the alleged offences U/s 294,506,323,332,353,186/34 of 3 I.P.C and U/s 3(1) (r),3(1) (s) and 3 (2) (V-a) of Schedule Cast & Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 before the learned trail Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the Court below was not justified in framing the aforesaid charges against the applicant under Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(V-a) Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Atrocities) Act as even if the entire prosecution case is taken as it is, no act constituting the aforesaid offence has been committed by the appellants. He further submits that there is delay in lodging FIR and the complainant is Police officer, therefore, the said charges are liable to be set-aside. 4. Learned State counsel has opposes the submission of learned counsel for the appellants. He further submits that the appellants have filed CRMP for quashing of FIR before Division Bench of this Court in CRMP No. 1379/2023 which was dismissed vide order dated 29/04/2024. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the material available with the charge-sheet particularly the FIR lodged by Dhanu Ram Chandravanshi, it is evident that there is allegation against the appellants that they abuse the victim on the basis of his caste or used filthy language due to his caste. this Court is of the opinion that the trial Court was justified in framing charge under Sections 294, 506 Part-II, 332, 353/34 of Indian Panel Code and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2) 4 (V-a) Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Atrocities) Act against the appellants. 7. In the result, the revision petition is dismissed. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Kamde