Surendra Singh Alias Pappu and Another vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Surendra Singh Alias Pappu and Another vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief: prayer to quash the proceedings refused; appeal finally disposed of with a direction that if the appellants appear/surrender before the trial court and apply for bail, the bail prayer shall be considered and decided in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Special Session Trial No. 61 of 2025 (arising out of Case Crime No. 356 of 2025, P.S. Kotwali Orai, District Jalaun), including the charge sheet dated 15.7.2025 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 21.8.2025, are liable to be set aside/quashed under Section 14-A(1) SC/ST Act on the contention that no offence is disclosed and the prosecution is mala fide and instituted to harass the appellants.

Court's answer

At the quashing stage only a prima facie case is to be seen, in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in R.P. Kapur, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, State of Bihar v. P.P. Sharma and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd.

Ratio / Principle

On the material on record, at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants/appellants; the submissions made at the bar relate to disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated by this Court.

Key takeaways

The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at the quashing stage.ratio¶13
The applicant/accused has the right of discharge before the trial court and is free to raise all his submissions in a discharge application there.ratio¶13
The prayer for quashing the entire proceeding of Special Session Trial No. 61 of 2025 is refused.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (Single Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav, J.; decided November 6, 2025) — Criminal Appeal No. 10036 of 2025 under Section 14-A(1) SC/ST Act by Surendra Singh alias Pappu and another seeking setting aside/quashing of the entire proceeding of Special Session Trial No. 61 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 356 of 2025, P.S. Kotwali Orai, District Jalaun, including charge sheet dated 15.7.2025 and cognizance/summoning order dated 21.8.2025 of the Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, for offences under Sections 115(2), 117(2), 351(2), 352 B.N.S., corresponding Sections 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC, and Section 3(2)(Va) SC/ST Act — HELD: on the material on record it cannot be said at this stage that no offence is made out against the applicants; the contentions raised are disputed questions of fact not amenable to adjudication in quashing jurisdiction; only a prima facie view is to be taken in light of R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab (AIR 1960 SC 866), State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992 SCC (Cr.) 426), State of Bihar v. P.P. Sharma (1992 SCC (Cr.) 192) and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful Haq (2005 SCC (Cr.) 283); the disputed defence cannot be examined at this stage and the accused retains the right of discharge before the trial court — quashing prayer REFUSED; if the appellants surrender and apply for bail, the bail prayer to be considered and decided in accordance with law; appeal finally disposed of.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 10036 of 2025

Surendra Singh Alias Pappu And Another

	Versus .....Appellant(s)
State of U.P. and Another	.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s) Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Kusum Devi, Vijay Bahadur Shivhare : G.A.

Court No. - 86

HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.

1.Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

2.This Criminal appeal under Section 14-A (1) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, (in short of 'the SC/ST Act) has been preferred by the appellants with the prayer to set aside/quash the entire proceeding of Special Session Trial No. 61 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime no. 356 of 2025 including the charge sheet dated 15.7.2025 cognizance and summoning order dated 21.8.2025 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jalaun at Orai, District Jalaun under Section 115 (2), 117 (2), 351 (2), 352 B.N.S. corresponding section 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC and 3 (2) (Va) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Kotwali Orai, District Jalaun.

3.The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment.

4.From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.IR. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of

CRLA No. 10036 of 2025

2

Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192, and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge before the court below and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court.

5.The prayer for quashing the entire proceeding of the aforementioned case is refused .

However, it is provided that if the appellants appear and surrender before the court below and apply of bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in accordance with law.

7.With the aforesaid observations this Criminal appeal is finally disposed off.

(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)

November 6, 2025 A.

Digitally signed by :- AFAQ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad