E-Paper
Allahabad high court flags ‘casual exercise of power’ by Aligarh trial judge
The court expressed serious concern over the manner in which judicial power was exercised, observing that such casual and careless orders have grave consequences for an individual’s personal liberty.
The Allahabad high court has sought an explanation from a trial judge posted in Aligarh following allegations that while summoning an accused, he cited a non-existent provision of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Justice Praveen Kumar Giri passed the order on a petition filed by one Rajiv Bajaj. While fixing January 30 as the next date of hearing, the court directed that until then, any warrant issued against the applicant shall remain in abeyance.
“The present Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Aligarh as well as the then Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Aligarh, who passed the summoning order dated April 30, 2024, are directed to submit their explanation as to why the summoning order was passed in such a casual manner, violating the fundamental right of the applicant under Article 21 of the Constitution of India,” the high court said in the order dated January 14.
The court expressed serious concern over the manner in which judicial power was exercised, observing that such casual and careless orders have grave consequences for an individual’s personal liberty.
Advocate Raghav Arora argued that the order was illegal and unsustainable. He pointed out that the trial court had invoked “Section 3(2)(5)” of the SC/ST Act, a provision that does not exist in the statute.
According to the applicant, he was falsely implicated under the SC/ST Act and the criminal proceedings stemmed from a property dispute that arose after he was allotted a piece of land declared as industrial land by the Uttar Pradesh State Industrial Development Corporation (UPSIDC).
He contended that the complainant initiated criminal proceedings solely to exert pressure on him in relation to the property dispute.
The complainant had accused the applicant of offences under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) and 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with offences under the SC/ST Act. On the complainant’s application, an Aligarh judicial magistrate directed the registration of an FIR.
The police subsequently registered an FIR under the relevant provisions of the IPC and the SC/ST Act and conducted an investigation, concluding that no prima facie case was made out against the accused. Dissatisfied with the outcome, the complainant challenged the closure report.
Thereafter, the special judge (SC/ST Act), Aligarh, treated the matter as a complaint case and proceeded to record the statements of the complainant and witnesses under Sections 200 and 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Subsequently, the special judge summoned the accused to face trial.
