The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) has stayed the trial proceedings in a criminal case involving allegations under Sections 307 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, after finding prima facie merit in the contention that the investigation was partly conducted by an officer not authorised under law.
The order was passed by Justice Rajeev Singh while hearing an application under Section 482 CrPC filed by the accused seeking quashing of the proceedings in S.T. No. 245 of 2008, arising out of Case Crime No. 06 of 2008, registered at Police Station Maharajganj, District Raebareli.
Counsel for the applicant argued that although the investigation was formally assigned to the Circle Officer, Maharajganj, crucial steps at the initial stage—including recording statements of the informant and witnesses, preparation of the site plan, and arrest memo—were carried out by the Station House Officer. This, it was contended, was in clear violation of Rule 7 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995, which mandates that offences under the Act must be investigated by a police officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police.
Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court judgment in State of Andhra Pradesh v. Viswanadula Chetti Babu (2010) 15 SCC 103, wherein it was held that investigation by an officer below the prescribed rank vitiates proceedings under the SC/ST Act. It was further pointed out that during trial, the then Circle Officer admitted in cross-examination that the initial case diary parchas and site plan were prepared by the SHO and not by him.
The State opposed the plea but did not dispute the statutory requirement under Rule 7 or the legal position laid down by the Supreme Court, and sought time to file a counter affidavit.
Considering the submissions, the High Court allowed the prayer, granted three weeks’ time to the State to file a counter affidavit and one week thereafter for rejoinder, and stayed the trial proceedings until the next date of hearing. The matter has been listed for further consideration on 27 January 2026.
Appearances:
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd.Altaf Mansoor, Aditya Vikram Singh, Tanay Chaudhary
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A
