Disposed¶18

Hussain and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC29 Oct 2025CRLA/2622/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court; Criminal Appeal No. 2622 of 2025; Shekhar Kumar Yadav, J.; quashing of cognizance/summoning order; Section 14-A(1) SC/ST Act; Sections 307, 323, 504 IPC; Sections 3(2)5, 3(1)Da, Dha SC/ST Act; prima facie test; disputed questions of fact; right of discharge before trial court; bail on surrender; R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab; State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal; State of Bihar v. P.P. Sharma; Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd.; Saharanpur; P.S. Chilkana; appeal disposed, quashing refused.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing the proceedings and the summoning/cognizance order refused; no substantive relief granted, save the direction that on appearance/surrender and application for bail, the bail prayer shall be considered and decided in accordance with law. ¶18

Hussain and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 18.12.2024 and the proceedings in Special Session Trial No. 2791 of 2024 are liable to be quashed/set aside in this appeal under Section 14-A(1) SC/ST Act. +1 more

¶9

Court's answer

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

¶16

Ratio / Principle

On the material on record it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the appellants; all submissions at the bar relate to disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated by this Court at this stage, where only a prima facie case is to be seen.

¶12

Key takeaways

The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage; the applicants have a right of discharge before the court below and are free to take all such submissions in a discharge application before the trial court.ratio¶15
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¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal appeal under Section 14-A(1) SC/ST Act against cognizance/summoning order dated 18.12.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Saharanpur in Special Session Trial No. 2791 of 2024 (Case Crime No. 12 of 2023, Sections 307, 323, 504 IPC and Sections 3(2)5, 3(1)Da, Dha SC/ST Act, P.S. Chilkana) — HELD, at the quashing stage only a prima facie case is to be seen in the light of R.P. Kapur, Bhajan Lal, P.P. Sharma and Zandu Pharmaceutical; it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the appellants, and the submissions raised disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated by the High Court. Disputed defence cannot be considered at this stage; the accused may press all contentions in a discharge application before the trial court. Quashing refused; appeal disposed with a direction that on surrender and bail application, bail be considered in accordance with law (Shekhar Kumar Yadav, J.).

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2622 of 2025

¶3

Hussain And 2 Others

¶4

.....Appellant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another		.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s)		: A.Z.Khan
Counsel for Respondent(s)		: G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 86

¶7

HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 is also present.

¶9

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (1) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (in short 'the SC/ST Act') has been preferred by the appellants with the prayer to quash/set aside the impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 18.12.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Saharanpur in Special Session Trial No. 2791 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No. 12 of 2023, under Sections 307, 323, 504 IPC and Section 3(2)5, 3(1)Da, Dha of SC/ST Act, P.S. Chilkana, District Saharanpur.

¶10

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

¶11

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 having no force is liable to be dismissed.

¶12

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.I.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 (Para-10) 2005

¶13

CRLA No. 2622 of 2025

¶14

¶15

SCC (Cr.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicants have got a right of discharge as the case may be, before the court below and they are free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court.

¶16

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

¶17

However, it is provided that 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.

¶18

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

¶19

(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)

¶20

October 30, 2025

¶21

RavindraKSingh

¶22

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

Hussain and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hussain and 2 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