Umesh Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Umesh Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer for quashing refused; appellant permitted to appear before the concerned court within 20 days through counsel and move a discharge application, to be decided by the Magistrate expeditiously, preferably within three months; no coercive measures against the appellants for 20 days or till filing of the discharge application, whichever is earlier; directions issued to the court below on considering discharge notwithstanding unchanged material.

Issue for consideration

Whether the charge-sheet dated 27.11.2024 and cognizance order dated 24.01.2025 in S.S.T. No. 81 of 2025 (arising out of Case Crime No. 244 of 2024) ought to be quashed on the ground that no offence is made out and the prosecution is mala fide, instituted to cause harassment.

Court's answer

In the absence of any ground recognised by the Supreme Court justifying quashing of the complaint or impugned proceedings, the prayer for quashing the charge-sheet and cognizance order is refused, as no abuse of the process of the Court is made out.

Ratio / Principle

The summoning court is vested with sufficient powers to discharge the accused even before the stage of framing of charges if, for reasons to be recorded, it considers the charge to be groundless.

Key takeaways

The appellant is permitted to appear before the concerned court within 20 days through counsel and move a discharge application; if such application is filed within that period, the Magistrate shall decide it expeditiously, preferably within three months thereafter.ratio¶15
No coercive measures shall be adopted against the appellants for a period of 20 days from the date of the order or till the filing of the discharge application, whichever is earlier.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Madan Pal Singh, J.) disposed of an appeal under Section 14A-1 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 seeking quashing of a charge-sheet dated 27.11.2024 and cognizance order dated 24.01.2025 in S.S.T. No. 81 of 2025 (State Vs. Umesh Chauhan), arising out of Case Crime No. 244 of 2024, P.S. Saidpur, District Ghazipur, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3) of B.N.S. and Sections 3(2)(5ka), 3(1) Da & Dha of the S.C./S.T. Act. Held: in the absence of any ground recognised by the Supreme Court justifying quashing, and no abuse of the process of the Court being made out, the prayer for quashing was refused; the summoning court has sufficient power to discharge the accused even before framing of charges if it records reasons that the charge is groundless. The appellant was permitted to appear within 20 days through counsel and move a discharge application, which the Magistrate is to decide expeditiously, preferably within three months; no coercive measures were to be adopted in the interim; and the court below was directed not to refuse discharge merely because the material at the discharge stage is the same as at summoning, while retaining liberty to proceed and secure the accused's presence if the summons is upheld.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1592 of 2025

Umesh Chauhan

.....Appellant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. and Another

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s)	: Akhilesh Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A., Satish Chandra Sinha

Court No. - 51

HON'BLE MADAN PAL SINGH, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

The present appeal under Section 14A-1 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed to quash the impugned charge-sheet dated 27.11.2024 and cognizance order dated 24.01.2025 passed by the Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), S.S.T. No. 81 of 2025, (State Vs. Umesh Chauhan) arising out of Case Crime No. 244 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3) of B.N.S. and Section 3(2)(5ka), 3(1) Da & Dha of the S.C./S.T. Act. Police Station, Saidpur, DistrictGhazipur.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that no offence is made out against the appellants and that the present prosecution has been instituted with a mala fide intention to cause harassment.

In the absence of any of the grounds recognized by the Supreme Court which may justify the quashing of the complaint or the impugned proceedings, the prayer for quashing the same is refused, as no abuse of the process of the Court is made out. The summoning court is vested with sufficient powers to discharge the accused even before the stage of framing of charges, if, for reasons to be recorded, it considers the charge to be groundless.

As requested, the appellant is permitted to appear before the concerned court within 20 days from today through counsel and move an application seeking discharge, if such application is filed within said period, the Magistrate concerned shall decide the discharge application as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months thereafter.

CRLA No. 1592 of 2025

2

No coercive measures shall be adopted against the appellants for a period of 20 days from today or till the filing of the discharge application, whichever is earlier.

If the concerned court, after hearing the counsel for the accused, is persuaded to take the view that the accused ought not to have been summoned and that the charge is groundless, it shall not abstain from discharging the accused merely on the ground that the material available at the time of summoning is the same as that available at the time of consideration of the discharge application.

On the other hand, if the court, after hearing the counsel for the accused, holds the view that the accused has been rightly summoned and that the material on record does not indicate the charges to be groundless, it shall pass an order to that effect and proceed further in the matter in accordance with law. It shall also be at liberty to adopt such measures as are permissible in law to secure the presence of the accused.

With the aforesaid observations, this appeal stands disposed of.

May 5, 2026 Akbar

(Madan Pal Singh,J.)

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AKBAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad