SMT. SEEMA CHAUDHARY AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
CRLA/8021/2025 · 2026-03-18
Sandeep Chaudhary Joint Registrar Judicial
Criminal Appealbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 1886 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 1886 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8021 of 2025 Court No. - 51 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Jitendra Kumar, learned A.G.A for the State as also perused the record. 2. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(1) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred to allow the present appeal and set aside the summoning order dated 11.03.2019, passed by learned Special Judge, (SC/ST Act)/ Addl. Session Judge, Ghaziabad and entire proceeding of S.T. No. 2256 of 2022 (State vs. Smt. Seema Chaudhary & another), under sections 323/34, 452/34, 506 IPC, and section 3 (1) Da, of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Sahibabad, District Ghaziabad. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the respondent-informant and her husband were tenants in his shop. They defaulted in payment of rent and, consequently, SCC No. 41/2013 (Smt. Seema Chaudhary vs. Ombir Singh) was instituted by the appellant. Soon after the said suit for eviction of the respondent was filed in the year 2013, a complaint making false allegations against the appellant was lodged by the respondent-complainant. She alleged therein that the appellants came to her shop at about 2:00 p.m. on 22.02.2013 and used force against her to get the shop vacated. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that the suit of the appellant was decreed on 05.10.2019. The said decree was challenged before this Court and the same is still pending. An execution application, being Civil Misc. No. 62 of 2022, was also filed by the appellant for execution of the decree passed in the SCC suit. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that had any mala fide intention existed in the mind of the appellant against the respondent- Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : G.S. Chauhan Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Smt. Seema Chaudhary And Another .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s)
informant, he would not have taken recourse to legal proceedings by instituting a suit and thereafter filing an execution application. The appellants were residing in Delhi and their shop was located at Ghaziabad. They never visited the shop and had proceeded against the respondent by filing civil proceedings to get their shop vacated. All the allegations against the appellants have been made by the respondent in order to continue her illegal possession of the shop.
Hence, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 6. Learned AGA submits that the impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. It is evident from the record that civil proceedings against the respondent-informant were initiated in the year 2013. The SCC suit was filed by the appellant with the intent to get his shop vacated from the possession of the respondent- informant. The said suit was decreed in the year 2019 and subsequently an execution petition was also filed by him. The conduct of the appellant in taking legal recourse for getting his shop vacated prima facie indicates that he did not have any criminal intent to get his shop vacated by using force. The respondent-informant has nowhere mentioned in her complaint about the pendency of civil proceedings against her. Perusal of the complaint filed along with this criminal appeal indicates that the SCC suit was filed on 12.03.2013, whereas the alleged date of incident in the complaint is
20.02.2013. It further reflects that the complaint against the appellant was filed soon before the institution of the civil suit. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The summoning order dated 11.03.2019, passed by learned Special Judge, (SC/ST Act)/ Addl. Session Judge, Ghaziabad and entire proceeding of S.T. No. 2256 of 2022 (State vs. Smt. Seema Chaudhary & another), under sections 323/34, 452/34, 506 IPC, and section 3 (1) Da, of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Sahibabad, District Ghaziabad, are hereby quashed. March 19, 2026 Ujjawal CRLA No. 8021 of 2025 2 (Anil Kumar-X,J.) Digitally signed by :- UJJAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad