Disposed¶19

Mohd Nasim and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Mar 2025CRLA/2204/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of cognizance/summoning order; Section 14-A(1) SC/ST Act appeal; prima facie test at pre-trial stage; disputed questions of fact; liberty to file discharge application before trial court; bail on surrender and appearance; R.P. Kapur AIR 1960 SC 866; Bhajan Lal 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426; P.P. Sharma 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192; Zandu Pharmaceutical 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283; Sections 308/323/325/504/506 IPC; Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)5A SC/ST Act; Case Crime No. 164 of 2022; Special S.T. No. 248 of 2023; P.S. Rudhauli, District Basti; Allahabad High Court, decided October 8, 2025.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing the impugned cognizance/summoning order refused; however, if the appellants appear and surrender before the court below and apply for bail, their bail prayer shall be considered and decided in accordance with law. ¶19

Mohd Nasim and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the cognizance/summoning order dated 22.3.2023 passed in Special S.T. No. 248 of 2023 should be set aside, on the appellants' contention that no offence against them is disclosed and the prosecution was instituted mala fide to harass them.

¶11

Court's answer

On perusal of the material on record and the facts of the case at this stage, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant; all submissions at the bar relate to disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court.

¶13

Ratio / Principle

At this 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, Bhajan Lal, P.P. Sharma and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd.

¶13

Key takeaways

The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.ratio¶16
The applicant/appellants have a right of discharge before the court below and are free to take all their submissions in a discharge application before the trial court.ratio¶16
If the appellants 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

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Shekhar Kumar Yadav, J.), in a Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A(1) of the SC/ST Act, declined to set aside the cognizance/summoning order dated 22.3.2023 passed by the Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Basti in Special S.T. No. 248 of 2023 (State Vs. Mohd. Nasim & others), arising out of Case Crime No. 164 of 2022, P.S. Rudhauli, District Basti, under Sections 308, 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)5A SC/ST Act. Holding that on the material on record it cannot be said that no offence is made out, and that the submissions raised disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated in the appeal, the Court applied R.P. Kapur, Bhajan Lal, P.P. Sharma and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. to confine itself to a prima facie view, left the accused free to press all submissions in a discharge application before the trial court, refused quashing, and finally disposed of the appeal directing that on appearance and surrender the appellants' bail application be considered in accordance with law.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2204 of 2025

¶3

Mohd Nasim And 3 Others

¶4

.....Appellant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of U.P. and Another

¶7

Counsel for Appellant(s)	: Amit Kumar Singh .....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 86

¶9

HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.

¶10

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

¶11

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 the cognizance/summoning order dated 22.3.2023 passed by Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Basti in Special S.T. No. 248 of 2023 (State Vs. Mohd. Nasim & others) arising out of Case Crime no. 164 of 2022, under Section 308, 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1) (r) (s), 3 (2) 5A SC.ST Act, P.S. Rudhauli, District Basti.

¶12

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.

¶13

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 applicant. 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 Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192, and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC

¶14

CRLA No. 2204 of 2025

¶15

¶16

(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.

¶17

5.The prayer for quashing the impugned order of the aforementioned case is refused .

¶18

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.

¶19

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

¶20

(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)

¶21

October 8, 2025

¶22

Ajeet/A.

¶23

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

Mohd Nasim and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Nasim and 3 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

Mohd. Asad Alias Mohd. Ashad Alias Sebu vs State of U.P.

Shahnawaj Ansari vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ramlakhan Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Arvind and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Virendra @ Shaktiman vs State of U.P. and Another

Suresh and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another