Disposed

Sushant Pal @ Vipin v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Another

Allahabad HC13 Nov 2025CRLA/3494/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal challenging a summoning order under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act. Noting identity discrepancies regarding the appellant and reliance on Gorige Pentaiah, the Court stayed operation of the summoning order against the appellant until final hearing.

What the court decided

AI extract

Sushant Pal @ Vipin vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3494 of 2024

Sushant Pal @ Vipin

.....Appellant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Another

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Appellant(s) : Parijat Mishra Belaura Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Paritosh Shukla, Sukh Deo Singh

¶9

Court No. - 29

¶10

HON'BLE ABDUL SHAHID, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

¶12

The appellant-Sushant Pal @ Vipin has challenged the summoning order dated 12.4.2017 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (PA) Act, Sultanpur. The incident is dated 6.11.2015 and the FIR was lodged on 6.11.2015, itself under Sections 323, 504, 506 and under Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST (PA) Act, 1989 against the named accused, namely, (i) Ramraj Pal s/o Bajlal Pal, (ii) Prashant s/o Ramraj Pal, (iii) Alok s/o Ramraj Pal and (iv) Vipin s/o Shyam Lal Pal. The complainant as well as the accused are the residents of the same gaon-sabha. The FIR has been specifically lodged with the name of accused as well as with the names of their father.

¶13

It, prima facie, appears that the complainant is very much aware of the name of the accused and their father.

¶14

After investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed against all the four named accused persons. It is alleged in the FIR that all the four accused had scolded with caste-remarks and beaten to the complainant. The medical of the injured took place on 6.11.2025 at 8:20 pm. There are two injuries, i.e., (i) Teath Bit Mark on Rt Anterior Aspect of Mid Arm and (ii) Redish Abraded Contusion on Rt Anterior Aspect 5.5 cm x 2.5 cm and in the opinion of the doctor, they are simple in nature.

¶15

Learned counsel for the appellant while relying on the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gorige Pentaiah vs. State of Andhra

¶16

CRLA No. 3494 of 2024

¶17

¶18

Pradesh , (2008) 12 SCC 531 has submitted that there is no ingredient of offence under the SC/ST(PA) Act, 1989. Learned counsel for the appellant has further specifically submitted that due to spoil the career the instant FIR has been lodged. There is collision and village-politics. They are trying to falsely implicate the appellant-Sushant Pal alias Vipin. He further categorically submits that his name is not Vipin and Shyam Lal Says, 'during investigation, I have no son by the name of Vipin. My son's name is Sushant'. The appellant has specifically mentioned in the memo of appeal that his name is Sushant and his nick-name is Manish, but he is not Vipin.

¶19

Learned AGA has got the instructions from the gram-sabha to the effect that Sushant Pal alias Manish is the son of Shyam Lal Pal.

¶20

The appellant has specifically mentioned his nick-name as Manish, prior to any report seek by State.

¶21

It appears that the appellant approached this Court by clean-hands by disclosing his nick-name to be Manish. There is discrepancies in the identity. The complainant and accused persons are belonging to the same gaon-sabha and complete name of the accused with their father's name are mentioned.

¶22

Learned counsel for the appellant has forcefully submitted that due to spoiling the career of Sushant Pal s/o Shyam Lal Pal, he is trying to falsely implicate the appellant.

¶23

There is force in the submission of learned counsel for the appellant.

¶24

Hence, the operation of the impugned summoning order dated 12.4.2017, passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Room No.8, Sultanpur in Special Case No.59 of 2017 arising out of Case Crime No.407 of 2015 under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(i)(x) of SC/ST (PA) Act, 1989, Police Station-Sangrampur, District-Amethi, is hereby stayed against the appellant-Sushant Pal alias Vipin till the next date of listing.

¶25