Case Title:
Israr @ Israr Ahmad And Others Vs. State Of UP Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another
Date Of Order:
3rd August 2022
Judge:
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.
Parties:
Petitioner: Israr @ Israr Ahmad And Others
Counsel for Applicant:- Chandra Bhanu Singh
Respondent: - State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another
Counsel for Opposite Party:- G.A., Seema Upadhyay
According to the Allahabad High Court, payment of compensation to victims under the SC/ST Act shall only occur after the accused has been found guilty, not before the FIR and charge sheet have been filed.
This section states that while saving the High Court's inherent powers, nothing in this Code shall be construed as limiting or affecting the inherent authority of the High Court to issue any orders that may be required to carry out any orders made hereunder, to prevent abuse of any Court's process, or to further the interests of justice.
This section talks about the punishment for rioting
Anyone found guilty of rioting will be punished with either type of jail for a time that may go as long as two years, a fine, or both.
The topic of punishment for willful harm-causing is covered in this section.
This section discusses intentional insult with the purpose to cause a disturbance.
Intentionally insulting someone and provoking them in this way with the aim or knowledge that doing so will likely lead to them breaking the peace or committing another crime is punishable by imprisonment of either kind for a term up to two years, a fine, or a combination of the two.
The topic of criminal intimidation punishment is covered in this section.
Criminal intimidation is a crime that carries a penalty of up to two years in jail, a fine, or both. If a person is threatened with death or serious injury, for example, they will also receive a fine.
Section 3 of this act talks about the penalties for atrocity offences
In this judgement, the Supreme Court ruled that it cannot be overstated that because members of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe belong to the lower socioeconomic groups in our nation, they are more vulnerable to coercion and should therefore be given a higher level of protection. The accused party is not eligible for a remedy if the courts find even the slightest indication of coercion or force. The facts and circumstances of each case would determine which criteria the courts should take into account.
The court determined that this case was directly covered by the ruling made by the Supreme Court in Ramawater v. State of Madhya Pradesh since the parties had resolved to put their conflict behind them and live in peace by reaching a compromise (supra).
Hence, the court allowed the petition.
The court also directed that a copy of the order be sent to the chief secretaries of the A.C.S. and the home departments of the governments of Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand, as well as the principal secretaries and additional chief secretaries of the social welfare departments, to ensure any necessary compliance.
Learn the practical aspects of CrPC HERE, CPC HERE, IPC HERE, Evidence Act HERE, Family Laws HERE, DV Act HERE
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement