Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8595 (CHH)

ASHME DEWANGAN v. TULSIRAM KHUTIYARE @ RAMCHARAN

CRA/401/2023 · 2025-03-25

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:14348 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 401 of 2023 1. Ashme Dewangan S/o Dukhit Ram Dewangan Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Sukuldaihan, Police Station - Lalbag, Tahsil And District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 2. Dukhit Dewangan S/o Late Jhagruram Aged About 61 Years R/o Village Sukuldaihan, Police Station - Lalbag, Tahsil And District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 3. Smt. Raniya Bai Dewangan W/o Dukhit Dewangan Aged About 56 Years R/o Village Sukuldaihan, Police Station - Lalbag, Tahsil And District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Appellants versus Tulsiram Khutiyare @ Ramcharan S/o Late Rajauram Satnami Aged About 61 Years Village - Sukuldaihan, P.S. Lal Bag Tahsil And District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Pramod Ramteke, Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 25.03.2025 1. This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 16.03.2023 passed by the learned Court of Special Judge (Atrocities) Rajnandgaon, District-Rajnandgaon (C.G.) in Special ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.03.28 18:05:12 +0530 2 Session Case No. 01/2023, whereby the learned trial Court allowed the complaint case filed by the respondent and registered a case against the appellants for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 506, 323 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(द)(ध) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 2. On a pointed query being made from the learned counsel for the appellants, whether his clients are responding or not, he submits that they are not responding. 3. From the perusal of the impugned order dated 16.01.2023, by which application under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. preferred by the complainant was allowed and appellants have been summoned, it transpires that the accused persons used derogatory language and caste-based slurs against complaint/respondent, physically assaulted him, and threatened to kill him. Therefore, there are sufÏcient facts to take cognizance of the offense against the accused persons under sections 294, 506, and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3(1)(द)(ध) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, hence, the order passed by the trial Court vide order dated 16.01.2023, does not suffer from any illegality, infirmity or jurisdictional error, therefore, the present appeal being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek