Arman Khan vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Arman Khan vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the charge sheet dated 30.03.2025 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 28.04.2025 should be set aside and further proceedings stayed, i.e., whether any offence is disclosed against the appellant or the prosecution is mala fide and instituted for harassment. +1 more

Court's answer

On the material on record it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the appellant; the submissions advanced at the bar are disputed questions of fact which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court at this stage.

Ratio / Principle

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.

Key takeaways

The accused/applicant has a right of discharge before the court below and is free to take all his submissions in a discharge application before the trial court.ratio¶17
The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the case as well as the cognizance/summoning order is refused.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal appeal under Section 14-A(1) SC/ST Act challenging charge sheet dated 30.03.2025 and cognizance/summoning order dated 28.04.2025 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Sant Kabir Nagar in Special Trial No. 262 of 2025 (State Vs. Mohd. Shadab and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 96 of 2025, P.S. Dhanghata, District Sant Kabir Nagar, under Sections 137(2), 352, 351(3), 87, 3(5) B.N.S. (old Sections 366, 363, 504, 506, 34 I.P.C.) and Sections 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)(va), 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act: HELD, dismissing the appeal, that at the summoning stage only a prima facie case is to be seen in the light of R.P. Kapur, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, State of Bihar v. P.P. Sharma and Zandu Pharmaceutical; submissions raising disputed questions of fact and the accused's disputed defence cannot be adjudicated at this stage, and the appellant is free to raise all such submissions in a discharge application before the trial court. Prayer for quashing refused.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 1373 of 2025

Arman Khan

.....Appellant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Appellant(s)	: Rayoof Ali .....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 86

HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A for the State as well as perused the record.

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(1) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred to setaside the impugned charge sheet dated 30.03.2025 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 28.04.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Sant Kabir Nagar in Special Trial No. 262 of 2025 (State Vs. Mohd. Shadab and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 96 of 2025, under Sections 137 (2), 352, 351 (3), 87, 3(5), B.N.S. (Old Section 366, 363, 504, 506 and 34 I.P.C.) and Section 3(1) (Dha), 3(2), (va), 3(2) (v) SC/ST Act, P.S.- Dhanghata, District- Sant Kabir Nagar, pending in the court of Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Sant Kabir Nagar with a further prayer to stay further proceedings of the aforesaid case.

The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that no offence against the appellant 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

CRLAD No. 1373 of 2025

2

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 appellant. 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.L.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 applicant has got a right of discharge as the case may be, before the court below and he is 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 cognizance/summoning order is refused.

Accordingly, the criminal appeal is dismissed .

(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)

November 26, 2025 Krishna*

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