Disposed¶21

Ashok Yadav and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC14 Oct 2025CRLA/1991/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad HC, CRLA 1991 of 2024, Shekhar Kumar Yadav J., 15.10.2025; SC/ST Act S.14-A(1) appeal; summoning order 31.01.2023, Special Judge (SC/ST) Deoria; IPC 323/324/504/506; SC/ST Act 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha); prima facie stage; R.P. Kapur; Bhajan Lal; P.P. Sharma; Zandu Pharmaceutical; quashing refused; discharge remedy; bail on surrender; appeal disposed.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing the proceedings and the cognizance/summoning order refused; no stay granted. Protective direction issued: on appearance/surrender before the court below and application for bail, the bail prayer shall be considered and decided in accordance with law. ¶21

Ashok Yadav and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned summoning order dated 31.01.2023 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Deoria, and the proceedings in Special Complaint No.124 of 2023, ought to be set aside/quashed on the ground that no offence is disclosed against the appellants and the prosecution is mala fide, with a further prayer to stay further proceedings.

¶13

Court's answer

On the material on record, at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the appellants; all submissions made at the bar relate to disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court, and 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, Bhajan Lal, P.P. Sharma and Zandu Pharmaceutical.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

The accused/applicant has a right of discharge before the court below and is free to take all submissions in a discharge application before the trial court; the disputed defence cannot be considered at this stage.

¶18

Key takeaways

The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the case as well as the cognizance/summoning order is refused.ratio¶19
If the applicants appear and surrender before the court below and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in accordance with law.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Appeal (Allahabad High Court, Shekhar Kumar Yadav, J.) under Section 14-A(1) SC/ST Act against summoning order dated 31.01.2023 of the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Deoria in Special Complaint No.124 of 2023, Misc. Case No.104 of 2019 (Sugreev Vs. Ashok and others) under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha) SC/ST Act, PS Bhatpar Rani, District Deoria. Held: at the summoning stage only a prima facie case is examined in the light of R.P. Kapur, Bhajan Lal, P.P. Sharma and Zandu Pharmaceutical; submissions raising disputed questions of fact cannot be adjudicated by the High Court, and the accused may pursue discharge before the trial court. Prayer for quashing refused; appeal disposed of with a direction that if the appellants appear/surrender and apply for bail, it shall be considered per law.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1991 of 2024

¶3

Ashok Yadav And 6 Others

¶4

.....Appellant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of U.P. and Another

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Appellant(s)	: Vikas Tripathi	Yadav,	Vishveshwar	Mani
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 86

¶9

HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.

¶10

Compliance affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State today in the Court, the same is taken on record.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned A.G.A for the State as well as perused the record.

¶12

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(1) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred to setaside the impugned summoning order dated 31.01.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, (SC/ST Act), Deoria in Special Complaint No.124 of 2023, Misc. Case No.104 of 2019 (Sugreev Vs. Ashok and others), under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506 1.P.C. and Section 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha) SC/ST Act, Police Station- Bhatpar Rani, District- Deoria with a further prayer to stay further proceedings of the aforesaid case.

¶13

The contention of the learned counsel for the appellants is that no offence against the appellant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with malafide intentions for the purposes of harassment.

¶14

Per contra, the learned AGA opposed the appeal and submitted that at the stage of summoning the accused, the Magistrate/Court dealing with the matter is required to apply judicial mind only with a view to take cognizance of the offence to find-out as to whether prima-facie case has been made out to summon the accused or not. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. Hence, the appeal

¶15

CRLA No. 1991 of 2024

¶16

¶17

having no force is liable to be dismissed.

¶18

From the perusal of 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 appellants. All the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question 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.L.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para10) 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 as the case may be, before the court below and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court.

¶19

The prayer for quashing the proceedings of case as well as cognizance/summoning order is refused.

¶20

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

¶21

With the aforesaid directions, this criminal appeal is finally disposed off.

¶22

(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)

¶23

October 15, 2025 Krishna*

¶24

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ashok Yadav and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Yadav and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases