RAMVEER UPADHYAY & ANR. versus STATE OF U.P. & ANR.

RAMVEER UPADHYAY & ANR. versus STATE OF U.P. & ANR.

The High Court was right not to quash Complaint Case No.19/2018 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. because the complaint, taken at face value, contained allegations that prima facie constituted offences under Section 3(1) of the Atrocities Act; the proviso to Section 14 does not make the Special Court's power exclusive and a Magistrate may take cognizance and commit the case; mere political vendetta or mala fides of the complainant is not by itself a ground to quash proceedings where the allegations disclose an offence and require trial.

Parties
Petitioner: Ramveer Upadhyay; Petitioner: Ranu Pandit; Respondent: State of U.P.; Respondent: Respondent No.2
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
20 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Special Leave Petition (criminal) No.2953 of 2022 / Hearing in the Supreme Court Against High Court Order Dismissing Petitioners' Application Under Section 482 Cr.p.c.
Outcome
Special Leave Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Section 482 Cr.p.c., Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Quashing of Criminal Proceedings, Malicious Prosecution, Jurisdiction of Special Court Under Section 14
Criminal Procedure Criminal Law Section 482 Cr.p.c. Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Quashing of Criminal Proceedings Malicious Prosecution Jurisdiction of Special Court Under Section 14

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ramveer Upadhyay

Petitioner

Ranu Pandit

Petitioner

State of U.P.

Respondent

Respondent No.2

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Special Leave Petition (criminal) No.2953 of 2022 / Hearing in the Supreme Court Against High Court Order Dismissing Petitioners' Application Under Section 482 Cr.p.c.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in refusing to quash Complaint Case No.19/2018 under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
  2. 2 Whether cognizance by a Magistrate and subsequent commitment vitiates proceedings in view of proviso to Section 14 of the Atrocities Act
  3. 3 Whether political vendetta/mala fides of complainant is ground to quash criminal proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court was right not to quash Complaint Case No.19/2018 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. because the complaint, taken at face value, contained allegations that prima facie constituted offences under Section 3(1) of the Atrocities Act; the proviso to Section 14 does not make the Special Court's power exclusive and a Magistrate may take cognizance and commit the case; mere political vendetta or mala fides of the complainant is not by itself a ground to quash proceedings where the allegations disclose an offence and require trial.

Court Disposition

Special Leave Petition dismissed

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order of the High Court dated 07.03.2022 is not interfered with
  • Special Leave Petition dismissed