HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 10964 of 2025 Court No. - 51 HON'BLE MADAN PAL SINGH, J. 1. Heard Shri Shiv Naresh, learned counsel for the appellants; Ms. Vandana Singh Parmar, Advocate holding brief for Shri S.P.S. Parmar, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2; and the learned AGA for the State-respondent. 3. By means of the present criminal appeal under Section 14A(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the appellants challenge the legality and validity of the summoning order dated 19.09.2025, whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Bhadohi–Gyanpur, has summoned the appellants to face trial under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3) of the BNS, and under Sections 3(1)(Da) and 3(1)(Dha) of the SC/ST Act. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the First Information Report was lodged by opposite party no. 2 with a delay of one day, for which no explanation has been provided. It is further submitted that the appellants did not commit any assault upon opposite party no. 2, and as per the medical report, the injuries sustained are general in nature. It is also contended that the appellants neither intentionally insulted nor used caste-based words against opposite party no. 2. The trial court, without properly considering the documentary evidence and statements of witnesses, has illegally summoned the appellants, and the order is arbitrary and liable to be set aside. 5. Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 submits that the incident is admitted, and the appellants committed assault, resulting in injuries to five persons. It is also submitted that the appellants abused opposite party no. 2 using caste-based remarks, and therefore, the trial court has rightly summoned the accused appellants. 6. Upon perusal of the record, it transpires that five persons were injured in the incident, which supports the prosecution case. The Investigating Officer has recorded the statements of the injured persons, which prima facie establish offences under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3) of the BNS and Sections 3(1)(Da) and 3(1)(Dha) of the SC/ST Act. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Km. Sakshi Patel, Shiv Naresh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Surya Pratap Singh Parmar Raja Ram And Another .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) 7. In view of the above, there is no illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the trial court summoning the accused appellants. 8. Accordingly, the criminal appeal is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. 9. The appellants are at liberty to file a bail application before the concerned trial court and may also file an appropriate application in light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022) 10 SCC 51. If such an application is filed, the concerned trial court shall pass an order in accordance with law. April 2, 2026 Akbar CRLA No. 10964 of 2025 2 (Madan Pal Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AKBAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad