Hanuman Singh and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko. and Another

Court No. - 12

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1023 of 2025

Appellant :- Hanuman Singh And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ashish Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Shravan Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ashish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and Sri Shravan Kumar, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2.

¶6

Present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(1) of the SC/ST Act, has been filed against the charge sheet dated 24.10.2024 and summoning order dated 21.01.2025, passed in SC/ST Case No. 133 of 2025 - State of U.P. Vs. Hanuman Singh and 3 Others, arising out of Case Crime No. 356 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 74, 324(4) and 352 of BNSS and Sections 3(1) (daa), 3(1)(dha) & 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST Act, Police Station - Jalalpur, District - Ambedkar Nagar.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that first information report was lodged by the private respondent on 04.09.2024, alleging that the appellants has forcibly entered into the fields of the complainant and damaged the tube well and subsequently assaulted the family members of the complainant and used caste related words.

¶8

It is next submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the FIR is false and misleading and the appellants are innocent and with regard to same incident it is the appellants who had lodged the FIR on 14.09.2024, which was registered as Case Crime No. 355 of 2024.

¶9

It is further submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that there is existing boundary dispute between the parties and proceedings under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code were initiated and even boundaries were demarcated. Despite demarcation it is the complainant who has demolished the boundary pillars.

¶10

It is lastly submitted that the criminal proceedings initiated at the behest of the complainant are totally illegal and arbitrary and it is a purely civil dispute between the parties which has

¶11

been given colour of criminal nature by lodging FIR. It is submitted that the appellants had approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 3058 of 2024, pertaining to proceedings under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and this Court had expedited the proceedings by means of order dated 02.04.2024.

¶12

Accordingly, it is stated that the dispute is of essentially civil nature and prayer for staying the criminal proceedings initiated by the private respondent has been made.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. on the other hand has opposed the appeal, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶14

In view of the fact that boundary dispute is existing between the parties and that the dispute is purely of civil nature, and attempt has been made to give the dispute criminal nature, case for interference is made out.

¶15

List this case on 26.05.2025.

¶16

Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps shall be taken against the appellants in pursuance to impugned charge sheet dated 24.10.2024 and summoning order dated 21.01.2025, passed in SC/ST Case No. 133 of 2025 - State of U.P. Vs. Hanuman Singh and 3 Others, arising out of Case Crime No. 356 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 74, 324(4) and 352 of BNSS and Sections 3(1)(daa), 3(1)(dha) & 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST Act, Police Station - Jalalpur, District - Ambedkar Nagar.

¶17

Order Date :- 16.4.2025 A. Verma

¶18

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶19

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Hanuman Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hanuman Singh and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rajeev Sharma vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Rajendra Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Vijay Pratap Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Ram Bali Yadav @ Rambali and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. (Home) Lko. and 3 Others

Laung Sri vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Mohd. Aslam vs Additional Principal Judge-Ii, Family Court, Barabanki and Another