The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) has set aside an order framing charges in a criminal case under the SC/ST Act, after observing that the trial judge failed to notice a glaring clerical error—his own name being incorrectly mentioned in the order.
Justice Alok Mathur passed the judgment in Criminal Appeal No. 1475 of 2025 filed by the appellant Nripendra Pandey @ Nihal Pandey under Section 14(A)(1) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The appeal challenged the order dated 24.02.2025 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lucknow in Sessions Case No. 161 of 2024, where charges had been framed under Sections 493, 504, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act.
Background
The charges framed alleged that the appellant, by deceitfully obtaining the confidence of the prosecutrix and cohabiting with her without lawful marriage, committed offences under Section 493 IPC. He was also accused of abusing and threatening her on multiple occasions and of committing acts considered humiliating under the SC/ST Act.
However, the appeal pointed out that the order framing charges stated that they were being framed by “Shri Dinesh Kumar Mishra, Special Judge (SC/ST Act),” while the order itself bore the signature of “Shri Vivekanand Sharan Tripathi, Special Judge (SC/ST Act),” dated 24.02.2025.
High Court’s Observations
Justice Mathur remarked that this contradiction demonstrated a serious lapse:
“Without commenting any further, the impugned order has clearly been passed without application of mind to such extent that the trial court has not even bothered to check and corrected his own name in the recital of the order. It is not expected that Special Judge (SC/ST Act), who is drawing charges in serious offences would overlook such basic errors pertaining to his own name.”
The Court held that the error was apparent on the face of the record and warranted judicial interference.
Decision
The High Court set aside the impugned order dated 24 February 2025 and remitted the matter back to the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lucknow, for passing a fresh order in accordance with law and with due expedition.
“The matter is remitted to the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lucknow to pass fresh orders in accordance with law with expedition,” the Court ordered.
Case Details:
Case Title: Criminal Appeal No. 1475 of 2025
Appellant: Nripendra Pandey @ Nihal Pandey
Respondents: State of U.P. & Another
Counsel for Appellant :- Wali Nawaz Khan,Alina Masoodi | Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
