Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:130887 Court No. - 83 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 11416 of 2024 Appellant :- Sonveer Yadav And 3 Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rajeev Malviya Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Santosh Kumar Shukla Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.Mr S. K. Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 is also present. 2. This criminal appeal under Sections 14-A(1) of SC/ST Act has been filed by appellants to quash the charge sheet dated 25.05.2024 as well as cognizance order dated 2.08.2024 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Firozabad in Case Crime No. 0056 of 2024, under Sections 325, 323, 504, 506, 336, 427 IPC and Sections 3(1)Da, Dha of SC/ST Act, P.S. Matsend, District Firozabad. 3. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the appellants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with malafide intentions for the purposes of harassment. Learned counsel for appellants also submitted that if the statement recorded by other witnesses may be taken into account for consideration then no case is made out against the appellants and as such, the order impugned is liable to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent no.2 vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the appeal by way of rebutting the stands taken up by learned counsel for appellants and raised legal issue that this is not the stage where those statements can be entertained in favour of appellants by this Court while adjudicating the controversy which has been raised through the instant appeal in shape of challenging the cognizance order dated 01.04.2024 and as such, there is no illegality in the order impugned. 5. Learned AGA appearing on behalf the State also seconded the arguments raised by learned counsel for respondent no.2 and submitted that the veracity of pith and substance of the statements recorded by the different witnesses at the stage of 161 Cr.P.C. shall be subject to specific finding on proved or not proved during trial only. 6. After having rival submissions extended by learned counsel for parties, the arguments raised by learned counsel for respondent no.2 seem to be justified since the veracity of statements recorded by other witnesses and other medical evidences can only be examined during examination in chief and cross examination but at this stage, no legal infirmity pertains in the order impugned. 7. Although, considering the arguments raised by learned counsel for appellant, the present appeal is disposed of finally with a direction to the court concerned that in case appellants surrender before it and apply for bail, their bail application may be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. Order Date :- 4.8.2025 RavindraKSingh Digitally signed by :- RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad