Partly allowed¶17

Vinay Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC4 Feb 2026CRLA/1156/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Vinay Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and Another; Allahabad High Court, Criminal Appeal No. 1156 of 2026, decided March 18, 2026, by Anil Kumar-X, J. Quashing of cognizance/summoning under Section 3(1)(Da) SC/ST Act for want of intention to insult or intimidate on grounds of caste; proceedings under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 352 BNS, 191 BNSS and Sections 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)(va) SC/ST Act permitted to continue; arises from Case Crime No. 63 of 2025, P.S. Obra, District Sonbhadra; appeal under Section 14-A(1) SC/ST Act partly allowed.

What did the court decide?

Appeal partly allowed: cognizance and summoning order dated 14.05.2025 and proceedings in Session Case No. 360 of 2025 quashed insofar as they relate to the offence under Section 3(1)(Da) of the SC/ST Act; proceedings for the remaining offences to continue in accordance with law. ¶17

Vinay Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether the cognizance taken and summons issued against the appellant for the offences under the SC/ST Act is sustainable, where (per the appellant) neither the informant nor any witness alleged any specific caste-based abuse against him.

¶10

Court's answer

On the case diary allegations (sudden assault on the informant's son returning from the cricket field, without premeditation), there was no intention on the part of the appellant to intentionally insult or intimidate the injured on account of his being a member of the SC/ST community; hence the offence under Section 3(1)(Da) of the SC/ST Act is not made out.

¶16

Ratio / Principle

The cognizance and summoning order dated 14.05.2025 and the proceedings in Session Case No. 360 of 2025 (arising out of Case Crime No. 63 of 2025) are quashed insofar as they relate to the offence under Section 3(1)(Da) of the SC/ST Act.

¶17

Key takeaways

The proceedings in respect of the remaining offences under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 352 BNS and 191 BNSS and Sections 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act shall continue in accordance with law.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

SC/ST Act — S. 3(1)(Da) — Criminal appeal under S. 14-A(1) against cognizance/summoning order dated 14.05.2025 of the Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Sonbhadra, in Session Case No. 360 of 2025 (Case Crime No. 63 of 2025, P.S. Obra, District Sonbhadra) — Allegations of sudden, unpremeditated assault on and abuse of the informant's son — Held, no intention to insult or intimidate the injured on account of his SC/ST membership; offence under S. 3(1)(Da) not made out — Cognizance and summoning order quashed qua S. 3(1)(Da) — Trial to continue for remaining offences under Ss. 115(2), 351(2), 352 BNS, 191 BNSS and Ss. 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)(va) SC/ST Act.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1156 of 2026

¶2

Vinay Kumar Singh

¶3

.....Appellant(s)

¶4

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another		.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s)		: Manoj Yadav
Counsel for Respondent(s)		: G.A.
Court No.- 51

¶5

HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J.

¶6

Counter affidavit filed by learned AGA for State is taken on record.

¶7

Case called out. None has appeared on behalf of opposite party No.2. As per instruction received from the learned AGA for State, notice has been served on opposite party No.2; however, no one has appeared on behalf of opposite party No.2 to oppose the appeal.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and Sri K.K. Gupta, learned AGA for State.

¶9

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, has been filed by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 14.05.2025 passed by learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. Ρ.Ο.Α. Act, Sonbhadra by which appellant has been summoned in Session Case No.360 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 63 of 2025, under Section 115(2), 351(2), 352 ΒΝNS and 191 BNSS and 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)(va) of SC/ ST Act, at Police Station Obra, District Sonbhadra.

¶10

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that neither the informant nor any of the witnesses has made any allegation against the appellant of using any specific caste-based abuse during the incident. However, the learned Trial Court has wrongly taken cognizance against the appellant even for the offence under the SC/ST Act. Hence, the impugned order taking cognizance against the appellant for the offence under the SC/ST Act is unsustainable and is liable to be set aside.

¶11

CRLA No. 1156 of 2026

¶12

¶13

Sri R.K. Gupta, learned AGA for the State, has submitted that the incident is supported by independent witnesses who were present at the time of occurrence. They have stated that the son of the informant was assaulted and abused by the appellant. Hence, the impugned order taking cognizance against the appellant does not warrant any interference.

¶14

6 . Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶15

It is apparent from the allegations that the incident occurred when the son of the informant was returning from the cricket field. Suddenly, the appellant surrounded him and started assaulting him without any premeditation. Other witnesses have also made similar allegations.

¶16

In the given circumstances, it does not appear that there was any intention on the part of the appellant to intentionally insult or intimidate the injured on account of his being a member of the SC/ST community. Hence, the offence against the appellant under Section 3(1)(Da) is not made out. However, the allegations of abusing the informant within public view, as well as the fact that both parties were aware of each other's identities, are not disputed.

¶17

Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed . The cognizance and summoning order dated 14.05.2025, as well as the proceedings in Session Case No.360 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 63 of 2025, insofar as they relate to offences under Sections 3(1)(Da) of the SC/ST Act, is hereby quashed. However, the proceedings in respect of the remaining offences under Section 115(2), 351(2), 352 ΒΝNS and 191 BNSS and Section 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)(va) of SC/ ST Act shall continue in accordance with law.

¶18

March 18, 2026 Mukesh

¶19

(Anil Kumar-X,J.)

¶20

Digitally signed by :- MUKESH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vinay Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinay Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Narendrapal @ Arvind vs State of U.P. and Another

Amit and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajbeer Singh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Haridwar vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Umashankar vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sangeeta Devi and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another