Vijay Veer and 6 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Vijay Veer and 6 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the cognizance/summoning order dated 15.07.2024 and of the entire proceedings of Special Session Trial No. 283 of 2024 refused; appellants left free to seek discharge before the trial court; bail to be considered and decided in accordance with law if they appear and surrender before the court below.

Issue for consideration

Whether the cognizance/summoning order dated 15.07.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Farrukhabad in Special Session Trial No. 283 of 2024, and the entire proceedings of that case, should be quashed/set aside. +1 more

Court's answer

From the perusal of the material on record and the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the appellants.

Ratio / Principle

All submissions made at the bar relate to disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court at this stage.

Key takeaways

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, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, State of Bihar v. P.P. Sharma and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd.ratio¶17
The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.ratio¶17
The applicants have a right of discharge, as may be available, before the court below and are free to take all their submissions in a discharge application before the trial court.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Shekhar Kumar Yadav, J.), judgment dated October 7, 2025, Criminal Appeal No. 8995 of 2024 (Vijay Veer and 6 others v. State of U.P. and another): An appeal under Section 14-A(1) of the SC/ST Act seeking quashing of the cognizance/summoning order dated 15.07.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Farrukhabad in Special Session Trial No. 283 of 2024 (registered at P.S. Kayamganj, District Farrukhabad under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(1)(Da) and 3(1)(Dha) of the SC/ST Act) was disposed of. Holding that, at the summoning/prima facie stage, the submissions raised were disputed questions of fact not adjudicable by the High Court, that the accused's disputed defence cannot be considered, and assessing the matter in the light of R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, State of Bihar v. P.P. Sharma and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful Haq, the Court refused the prayer to quash, preserved the appellants' right to seek discharge before the trial court, and directed that their bail prayer be considered and decided in accordance with law upon appearance and surrender.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8995 of 2024

Vijay Veer And 6 Others

.....Appellant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Appellant(s)	: Lavkush Kumar Bhatt .....Respondent(s)
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. It is pointed out by learned AGA that notice upon opposite party no. 2 has been served.

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 cognizance/summoning order dated 15.07.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Farrukhabad in Special Session Trial No. 283 of 2024, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)(Da) 3(1)(Dha) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Kayamganj, District Farrrukhabad as well as entire proceedings of the said case.

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

CRLA No. 8995 of 2024

2

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 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.

The prayer for quashing the proceedings of case as well as summoning 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.

(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)

October 7, 2025 RavindraKSingh

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