Disposed

Pradeep Kumar Alias Ram Babu and 4 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Feb 2026CRLA/473/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court admitted a criminal appeal against a summoning order under the SC/ST Act. Relying on Supreme Court precedent regarding the necessity of proving caste-based humiliation, the court issued notice and stayed coercive process pending the next date of hearing.

What did the court decide?

Coercive process stayed until 20.04.2026; notice issued to respondent no.2.

Pradeep Kumar Alias Ram Babu and 4 Others vs State of… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 473 of 2026

¶3

Pradeep Kumar Alias Ram Babu And 4 Others

¶4

.....Appellant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

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

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Appellant(s)	: Brijendra Yadav	Chaudhary, Shashi Kant
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

¶9

Court No. - 27

¶10

HON'BLE RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned AGA for the State respondent No. 1 and perused the record.

¶12

Instant criminal appeal, under Section 14A(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, has been preferred against summoning order dated 21/11/2024 passed by the Court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Raebareli in Complaint Case No.575 of 2023, whereby the appellants have been summoned in the complaint case "Sunit Kumar vs. Pradeep Kumar alias Ram Babu" for charges under Sections 323 IPC and 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.

¶13

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that according to the prosecution version, the incident took place on 23/08/2022 at 9:00 AM. The dispute involved opening a drain (nali) from the field of the complainant by the appellants. The water from the field of the appellants was flowing when the complainant raised an objection to this and asked the appellants to refrain from cutting water from his field, they insulted and abused him with caste-indicative words and appellant no.2, Anand Babu, slapped him. On hearing scream, witnesses came and rescued the complainant.

¶14

He next submitted that from bare perusal of the complainant version, it is obvious that he was not humiliated by the appellants due to reason that

¶15

CRLA No. 473 of 2026

¶16

¶17

he belongs to the Scheduled Caste, but the dispute occurred between them. A dispute occurred between the parties regarding the cutting of the drain in front of the field of the complainant by the appellants. In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hitesh Verma versus the State of Uttarakhand and another, reported in (2020) 9 SCR 593 , it may be said that offense under the Act is not established merely due to the fact that the informant is a member of the Scheduled Caste unless there is an intention to humiliate a member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe for the reason that the victim belongs to such a caste. In the present case, the dispute occurred due to the drain.

¶18

Learned AGA submitted that only due to the fact that the appellants cut a drain in front of the land of the complainant, which was objected to by him, it cannot be said that there was a civil or land dispute between the parties.

¶19

The matter requires consideration.

¶20

Admit.

¶21

Issue notice to respondent no.2, returnable at an early date through the concerned CJM.

¶22

List on 20.04.2026.

¶23

Till the next date of listing, no coercive process shall be adopted against the appellants in pursuance of the impugned summoning order dated 21.11.2024 passed by the Court of the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Raebareli in Complaint Case No. 575 of 2023, under Section 323 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.

¶24

(Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.)

¶25

February 24, 2026 KR

¶26

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

Pradeep Kumar Alias Ram Babu and 4 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep Kumar Alias Ram Babu and 4 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harpreet Kaur and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Prashant Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Rohit vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 10 Others

Prashant Rastogi vs The State of U.P. through Principal Secretary, Home Department and 3 others

Shalendra Vimal @ Quater vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Kumar Sanjay Srivastava @ Sanjay Kumar Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another