HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 7941 of 2025 Court No. - 51 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J. 1. Heard Shri Pramod Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellants, Shri Krishna Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent/informant and Shri K.K. Gupta, learned AGA for the State. 2. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(1) of The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellants with a prayer to allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order dated 31.7.2025 passed by Special Judge SC/ST Act, Mirzapur in Special Session Trial No. 293 of 2021 (State Vs. Sudhir Bind and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 91 of 2021 under section 323, 504, 506, 427, 452 I.P.C. and 3 (1) Da, Dha SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Mirzapur. By the said impugned order, learned trial court allowed the application 44 (Kha) under section 319 Cr.P.C. moved by the opposite party no.2 and summoned the appellants to face trial for the offence committed under the aforesaid Sections. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that appellants were summoned by the learned trial court by allowing an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. The learned trial court has relied upon the statements of PW-1 Pappu, who has not witnessed the incident. Hence, the impugned order summoning the present appellants is illegal and is liable to be set aside. 4. Learned AGA and the learned counsel for the respondent/informant submitted that perusal of the order indicates that even injured witnesses Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Pramod Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Krishna Kumar Shukla Balak Chand Bind And 2 Others .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) were examined before the concerned court. Hence, it cannot be said that those witnesses had not supported the prosecution story. Hence, there is no need to interfere in the impugned order. 5. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record including the impugned summoning order. 6. It transpires form the impugned order that other witnesses were also examined by the learned trial court. It has been mentioned that PW-2 and PW-3 are injured witnesses. However, the impugned order further reveals that the learned trial court has relied upon the statement of PW-1, Pappu, who himself as admitted in his cross-examination that he was not present on the spot at the time of occurrence. 7. In the given circumstances, the impugned order dated 31.7.2025 passed by the learned trial court is set aside. The learned trial court is, therefore, directed to pass a fresh order in accordance with law, after examining the testimony of other witnesses. 8. This criminal appeal is, accordingly, allowed. March 19, 2026 SK CRLA No. 7941 of 2025 2 (Anil Kumar-X,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUSHEEL KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad