TEJ BAHADUR AND 3 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND 3 OTHERS
/2894/2025 · 2025-10-13
Saurabh Lavania
Criminal Appealbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 200577 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 200577 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2894 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned AGA for the State of U.P. as well as perused the record.
2. The instant appeal has been preferred seeking following main relief(s):-
"1-यह िक अपीलकतार्गण के िवरूद्व एस०टी० नं0 511/2022 मु०अ०सं० 274/2021 अन्तगर्त धारा- 147, 323, 504, 506 आई०पी०सी० व 3 (1) द०ध० 3 (2) 5ए एस०सी०/एस०टी० एक्ट थाना बाजार शुक्ल िजला अमेठी में पािरत आदेश िदनांक 09.05.2022, 28.08.2025 व 05.07.2025 तथा आरोप-पत्र िदनांक 01.01. 2022 से सम्बंिधत समस्त कायर्वािहयों को िनरस्त करने की न्यायिहत में कृ पा की जाय।"
3. The proceedings in issue have been challenged on the ground that name of appellants do not find place in the charge sheet, as after due investigation, the Investigating Officer (in short "IO") filed the charge sheet only against Omkar s/o Ramsevak Maurya, Sanjay s/o Ram Pratap Maurya, Tej Bahadur Yadav s/o Ganga Ram Yadav, Shyamlal s/o Ganga Ram Yadav and Sunil s/o Mewalal Yadav and despite this, the trial court namely Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Sultanpur summoned the appellants by the impugned order dated 09.05.2022.
4. The ground aforesaid is not sustainable for the reason that the injured(s) namely Kanchan, Seema and Kundan all daughters of Tej Bahadur, during investigation, indicated the names of the appellants and the appellants are named in the FIR lodged by the informant/Kanchan and also that as per the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court passed in the case of Nahar Singh vs. State of U.P. and Another, (2022) 5 SCC 295 : 2022 SCC OnLine SC 332, the court concerned for the purposes of summoning the accused is under obligation to apply its mind and the court should not act mere as a post office and the persons not named in the charge sheet can also be summoned.
5. Taking note of aforesaid, the instant appeal is dismissed. October 13, 2025 Arun/- Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Adarsh Kumar Maurya, Rakesh Kumar Maurya Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Tej Bahadur And 3 Others .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench