Parvesh @ Golu @ Pravesh Patel and 2 Others v. State of U.P Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC1 Dec 2025CRLA/3857/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal under section 14-A(1) SC/ST Act challenging proceedings in a complaint case arising from a protest petition after a final report, and the summoning order. The High Court admitted the appeal, issued notice to respondent no.2, and directed that no coercive process be adopted against the appellants till the next date.

What did the court decide?

Notice issued to respondent no.2; no coercive process against appellants till next date of listing.

Parvesh @ Golu @ Pravesh Patel and 2 Others vs State of… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3857 of 2025

¶3

Parvesh @ Golu @ Pravesh Patel And 2 Others

¶4

.....Appellant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Civil Sectt. Lko. And Another

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Appellant(s) Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Vijay Pal Verma : G.A.

¶9

Court No. - 27

¶10

HON'BLE RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned AGA for the State respondent no.1 and perused the record.

¶12

Instant criminal appeal under section 14-A(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred for qushing/setting aside the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.116/2025 (Shiv Kumar Bharti versus Rahul Verma & others) (Case Crime No.144/2025) under Sections 333, 115(2), 352, 131 BNS and Section 3(1) (Da) (Dha) SC/ST Act, pending in the court of Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Gonda, as well as the summoning order dated 12.9.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Gonda.

¶13

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the FIR was lodged at the instance of respondent no.2 against the appellants and one unknown persons on 13.05.2025. It was lodged at the behest of one Ramsajiwan was inimical terms with the appellants. The police has submitted final report in the case after investigation in favour of the appellants. The implication of the appellant was found false and the presence of the appellants was not found on the spot on alleged date time and place of the incident. On the basis of CDR of mobile phone of the appellants, their location was found in Ayodhya and Basti. The final report was submitted for want of evidence against the appellants. He next submitted that feeling aggrieved by the final report, the informant filed protest petition before the trial court which was treated as complaint and after adopting

¶14

CRLA No. 3857 of 2025

¶15

¶16

procedure of complaint case, learned trial court has summoned the appellants for trial of alleged offences. The appellants are falsely implicated.

¶17

Matter requires consideration.

¶18

Admit.

¶19

Issue notice to the respondent no.2 returnable at an early date through CJM concerned.

¶20

Steps be taken within a week.

¶21

List this case on 16.01.2025.

¶22

Till the next date of listing, no coercive process shall be adopted against the appellants.

¶23

(Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.)

¶24

December 1, 2025

¶25

¶26

Digitally signed by :- RABINDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Parvesh @ Golu @ Pravesh Patel and 2 Others v. State of U.P Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parvesh @ Golu @ Pravesh Patel and 2 Others v. State of U.P Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sangeeta Gond vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Bhawana Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. /Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Aashad Khan and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Otehrs

Kalinga Patna Gauri vs Union of India Thru. Itelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau, Lucknow

Mohd. Sharif vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Gufran Khan vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another