Subrati Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

Subrati Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Directions issued: appellant to approach the court concerned within one month and file his bail application, to be disposed of expeditiously in light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51; no coercive process against the appellant for one month or till his appearance, whichever is earlier. Notice to private respondent no.2 dispensed with (para 12). Merits of the challenge to the cognizance/summoning orders and charge sheet not adjudicated.

Issue for consideration

Whether directions should be issued to the appellant to appear before the court below, file his bail application, and receive interim protection from coercive process (the prayer to which counsel confined himself at this stage, undisputed by the A.G.A.). +1 more

Court's answer

The appellant is directed to approach the court concerned within a month and file his bail application, which shall be disposed of as expeditiously as possible in light of the Supreme Court judgment in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2022) 10 SCC 51.

Ratio / Principle

For a period of one month, or till the appearance of the appellant, whichever is earlier, no coercive process shall be adopted against the appellant.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal appeal under s.14A(1) of the SC/ST Act, 1989 (CRLA No. 4130 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, J., decided 19-12-2025) filed by Subrati Ali — described as a marginal witness to a sale deed executed by Umashankar Saroj in favour of co-accused Sakeela Begam — against the cognizance/summoning orders dated 28/06/2025 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Pratapgarh and the charge sheet dated 06/06/2025 in S.C. No. 1130/2025 (State vs. Jameel Ahmad and others), arising out of FIR/Case Crime No. 372 of 2024 lodged on 01/07/2024 on a s.156(3) CrPC application by respondent no.2, invoking ss.406, 419, 420, 506, 467, 468 and 471 IPC and ss.3(1)(d), 3(1)(dha), 3(2)va and 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act, P.S. Antoo, District Pratapgarh. The appellant had earlier obtained interim protection from arrest in Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 4461 of 2025 before a Division Bench of the same Court. At the hearing, counsel confined the prayer to directions that the appellant be permitted to appear before the court below and file his bail application with some protection; the learned A.G.A., while opposing the merits contentions, did not dispute this prayer. The Court directed the appellant to approach the court concerned within one month and file his bail application, to be disposed of as expeditiously as possible in light of Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2022) 10 SCC 51, and further directed that for one month, or till the appellant's appearance (whichever is earlier), no coercive process shall be adopted against him. Notice to private respondent no.2 was dispensed with. The appeal was disposed of; the merits of the challenge to the cognizance/summoning orders and charge sheet were not adjudicated.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4130 of 2025

Subrati Ali

.....Appellant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Affairs Lko. And Another

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s) Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Akhilesh Pratap Singh : G.A.

Court No. - 27

HON'BLE RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State respondent no.1 and perused the record.

In light of the proposed order, notice to private respondent no.2 is dispensed with.

This instant criminal appeal, under section 14A(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, has been preferred against the cognizance/summoning orders dated 28/06/2025 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Pratapgarh and the charge sheet dated 06/06/2025 in S.C. No. 1130/2025, State vs. Jameel Ahmad and others, arising out of Case Crime No.372 of 2024, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 506, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC, and section 3(1)(d), 3(1)(dha), 3(2)va, and 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, Police Station Antoo, District Pratapgarh.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is a marginal witness to the sale deed executed by Umashankar Saroj in favour of co-accused Sakeela Begam, which was executed in pursuance

CRLA No. 4130 of 2025

2

of an agreement to sale executed by Jeetlal. All the proceedings were well within the knowledge of respondent no.2, but after some time, he demanded money from co-accused, Mohammad Harun, and some dispute arose, whereupon the respondent no.2 filed an application under Section 156(3) CrPC, upon which the impugned FIR was lodged on 01/07/2024 on orders of the court. The appellant had filed Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition No.4461 of 2025 before this Court, in which a Division Bench of this Court granted interim protection from arrest to the appellant, the petitioner shall not be arrested on the basis of the impugned FIR, unless sufficient and credible evidence is available against him . The appellant was not arrested during the investigation, pursuant to said interim order of the Hon'ble Court, but after the investigation, charge sheet has been filed against him. In fact, no case is made out against him under the aforesaid penal Sections. He has not committed any offense. Medical evidence does not support the prosecution. He is not a man of criminal antecedent.

At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant confines his prayer only to the extent that certain directions may kindly be issued to the appellant to appear before the court below and file his bail application and some protection may be granted to him.

Learned A.G.A has also opposed the contention of learned counsel for the appellant regarding the merits of the case, but he did not dispute the aforesaid prayer made by counsel for the appellant regarding filing of the bail application.

In view of the above, it is directed that the appellant shall approach the court concerned within a month and file his bail application, and the same

CRLA No. 4130 of 2025

3

shall be disposed of as expeditiously as possible. in light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil versus Central Bureau of Investigation and another (2022)10 SCC 51 .

For a period of one month, or till the appearance of the appellant, whichever is earlier, no coercive process shall be adopted against the appellant.

In view of the above direction, the appeal is disposed of.

(Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.)

December 19, 2025 KR

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