HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6176 of 2024 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for opposite party nos.2 to 6 and learned A.G.A. and perused the record. 2. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14A(1) of S.C. & S.T. Act by the appellants challenging the impugned order dated 30.05.2024 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge S.C.& S.T. Act, Hapur in Complaint Case No.01 of 2024 arising out an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., P.S. Babugarh, District Hapur whereby complaint of the appellant has been rejected. 3. Tersely, as per the prosecution case, the appellant moved an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., alleging that on 23.11.2023 at about 7:00 p.m., opposite party no.3 Manoj entered his house and allegedly misbehaved with his wife and made obscene gestures towards her. On her raising an alarm, the appellant and his family members reached the spot. Thereafter, the other accused persons, armed with lathis and sticks, allegedly entered the house and assaulted the appellant and his family members. During the incident, opposite party no.6 Shivam sustained an injury after falling and hitting his head against the wall. The accused persons-opposite party nos.2 to 6 allegedly fled from the spot after extending threats to kill the appellant. 4. Briefly, the grounds of the appeal are that the impugned order dated 30.05.2024 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge S.C.& S.T. Act, Hapur is wholly illegal and not sustainable in the eyes of law. The impugned order is based on surmises and conjunctures as such same is liable to be quashed. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Ajai Kumar, Krishna Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Manju Yadav Arvind .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. Learned counsel for the appellant/complainant submitted that the learned court below has erred in dismissing the complaint without properly appreciating the allegations made in the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and the statements of the complainant and the witnesses recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. It was contended that the statements of the complainant and the witnesses consistently disclosed that opposite party nos. 2 to 6 had unlawfully entered the house of the appellant armed with lathi, danda and balkati and had assaulted and intimidated the members of the complainant's family. It was further submitted that the allegation regarding the attempt to molest the wife of the informant by opposite party nos. 3 and 4 was specifically made and was also supported by the material available on record. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that, at the stage of taking cognizance/summoning, the court is required to examine whether a prima facie case is disclosed from the complaint and the statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. and is not required to conduct a meticulous appreciation of evidence as would be undertaken at the stage of trial. The mere absence of a medical or injury report, particularly when the principal allegations relate to unlawful entry, assault, intimidation and an attempt to molest, could not by itself constitute a sufficient ground for dismissal of the complaint. It was, therefore, submitted that the impugned order dated 30.05.2024 suffers from an error of law and fact and is liable to be set aside. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties no.2 to 6 and learned A.G.A. for the State supported the impugned order and submitted that the learned court below had rightly dismissed the complaint after considering the statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. It was contended that the allegations made in the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. were not supported by any independent or reliable material. Although the appellant and the witnesses alleged that opposite party nos. 2 to 6 were armed with lathi, danda and balkati and that an occurrence involving physical assault had taken place, neither any specific injury nor the identity of the person allegedly injured was disclosed in the complaint or in the statements recorded during inquiry. No medical examination report or injury report was produced in support of the allegation. Learned counsel for the opposite parties further submitted that, in respect of the very same incident, Case Crime No. 355 of 2023 had already been registered by Manoj, opposite party no. 3, against Arvind, the appellant, and others. According to CRLA No. 6176 of 2024 2 the opposite parties, the subsequent institution of the present complaint was therefore a counterblast to the aforesaid criminal case and was actuated by an ulterior motive. It was argued that the allegations in the complaint were an afterthought and had been deliberately introduced to create a defence in the earlier criminal case. Thus, in the absence of any corroborative medical or other independent evidence and having regard to the existence of the earlier case arising out of the same occurrence, the learned court below committed no error in dismissing the complaint. 7. An application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved by the appellant/complainant, which was treated as a complaint case. During the course of the inquiry, the statement of the complainant under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and the statements of the victim/witnesses under Section 202 Cr.P.C. were recorded. Thereafter, the complaint came to be dismissed by the impugned order dated 30.05.2024. The allegation contained in the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was that opposite party nos.3 and 4 had attempted to molest the wife of the informant and that opposite party nos. 2 to 6 had entered the house of the appellant. It was further alleged that, during the ensuing scuffle, opposite party no. 6, namely Shivam, fell down and sustained injuries. Further more in their statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., the appellant/complainant and the witnesses stated that opposite party nos. 2 to 6 had entered the appellant's house armed with hard and blunt objects, namely lathi, danda and balkati. However, neither in the complaint nor in the statements of the appellant/complainant and the witnesses was any specific injury sustained by any person disclosed. Moreover, no medical report or injury report was placed on record to substantiate the allegation that any injury had actually been caused in the alleged occurrence. 8. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court finds no illegality, perversity or infirmity in the impugned order dated 30.05.2024 passed by the learned court below. Although allegations have been made regarding the attempted molestation of the wife of the appellant and the alleged entry of opposite party nos. 2 to 6 into the house of the appellant while armed with lathi, danda and balkati, the allegations are not supported by any specific or cogent particulars regarding the injuries allegedly sustained during the occurrence. Significantly, neither the complaint nor the statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. disclose any CRLA No. 6176 of 2024 3 specific injury sustained by any person, nor has any medical or injury report been brought on record in support of the allegation. 9. The learned court below, after considering the complaint and the statements of the complainant and the witnesses recorded during the inquiry, has rightly found that the material placed before it did not disclose sufficient grounds for proceeding against the opposite parties. The existence of an earlier criminal case arising out of the same occurrence also lends support to the submission of the opposite parties that the present complaint was instituted as a counterblast. In the circumstances, this Court finds no ground to interfere with the well-reasoned order passed by the learned court below. 10. Accordingly, the criminal appeal is devoid of merit and is, hereby, dismissed. The impugned order dated 30.05.2024 is affirmed. September 9, 2026 Asha CRLA No. 6176 of 2024 4 (Santosh Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad