Govind Sharma and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Govind Sharma and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer for quashing the proceedings, charge-sheet and summoning/cognizance order refused; appeal finally disposed of with the protective direction that on appearance, surrender and bail application before the court below, bail shall be considered in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether the charge-sheet dated 15.02.2025, the cognizance/summoning order dated 26.03.2025 and the entire proceedings of S.S.T. No. 599 of 2025 should be quashed on the appellants' contention that no offence against them is disclosed and the prosecution has been instituted mala fide for harassment.

Court's answer

On the material on record it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the appellants; the submissions at the bar raise disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court, and 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; the disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

Ratio / Principle

The 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.

Key takeaways

Protective direction: 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., decided November 3, 2025) under Section 14-A(1) of the SC/ST Act seeking quashing of charge-sheet dated 15.02.2025, cognizance/summoning order dated 26.03.2025 and the entire proceedings of S.S.T. No. 599 of 2025 (Case Crime No. 57 of 2025, P.S. Ujhani, District Budaun) under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS and Sections 3(2)(va), 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha) SC/ST Act: HELD, on perusal of the record it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the appellants; submissions raising disputed questions of fact cannot be adjudicated by the High Court at the stage where only a prima facie case is to be seen, tested against the principles in R.P. Kapur, Bhajan Lal, P.P. Sharma and Zandu Pharmaceutical; the disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage; quashing refused; appellants free to press all submissions in a discharge application before the trial court; if they appear, surrender and apply for bail, the bail prayer is to be considered and decided in accordance with law. Appeal finally disposed of.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3967 of 2025

Govind Sharma And 2 Others

.....Appellant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s)	: Ashish Kumar, Girish Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 86

HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

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 charge-sheet dated 15.02.2025, cognizance/summoning order dated 26.03.2025 as well as the entire proceedings of S.S.T. No. 599 of 2025 (State vs. Govind Sharma and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.57 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS and Section 3(2)(va), 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Ujhani, District- Budaun, pending in the court of learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Budaun.

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.

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.

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

CRLA No. 3967 of 2025

2

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 (Para10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 . The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the appellants 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.

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

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.

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

November 3, 2025 Saif

(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)

Digitally signed by :- SHAIKH SAIF ABDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad