HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4274 of 2024 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. Heard Mr. Anand Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State and Mr. Mukesh Joshi, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. 2. The present appeal under Section 14-A(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, is directed against the order dated 27.03.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Moradabad, whereby the application of the appellant under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. seeking a direction for registration and investigation of her complaint was rejected. 3. The case of the appellant, as set out in her application, is that on 19.07.2023, at about 4:00 p.m., the accused persons forcibly entered her house, assaulted her, and committed gang rape accompanied with caste- related abuses and threats. Despite lodging a complaint before the authorities on 21.07.2023, no effective action was taken by the police. The application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was thereafter moved before the Special Judge. 4. The learned Court, however, upon obtaining a police enquiry report, found that no supporting evidence was forthcoming, that there was previous enmity between the parties, and that prior cases were pending between them. On that basis, it concluded that no cognizable offence was made out and rejected the application. 5. Learned AGA has opposed the appeal but does not dispute the settled legal position that once cognizable offences are disclosed, registration of FIR is mandatory. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Anand Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Mukesh Joshi Smt Shashi Devi .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 6. Upon hearing rival submissions and perusal of the record, this Court finds that the learned Special Judge dismissed the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. essentially on the basis of a police enquiry report and prior litigations between the parties. 7. However, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari v. Government of U.P. (2014) 2 SCC 1 has authoritatively held that where information discloses commission of a cognizable offence, registration of FIR under Section 154 Cr.P.C. is mandatory, and no preliminary enquiry is ordinarily permissible, except in certain limited categories (such as matrimonial disputes, commercial offences, medical negligence, etc.). 8. Further, in Priyanka Srivastava v. State of U.P. (2015) 6 SCC 287, the Supreme Court emphasised that an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. must be supported by an affidavit to prevent abuse of process, but once such affidavit is filed and cognizable offences are disclosed, the Magistrate cannot refuse to exercise jurisdiction merely by relying upon police enquiries or collateral considerations. 9. The settled legal position, therefore, is that while safeguards against frivolous litigation exist, the test at the stage of Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is whether the allegations prima facie disclose commission of cognizable offences. The veracity of the allegations and rival versions are matters for investigation and trial. 10. In the present case, the allegations of trespass, assault, gang rape, and caste-based abuses, if accepted at face value, clearly disclose commission of cognizable offences under the Indian Penal Code as well as the SC/ST Act. The rejection of the application by treating the police enquiry report as conclusive is contrary to law. 11. In the present case, the allegations as narrated in the complaint of trespass, assault, gang rape and caste-based abuses undoubtedly disclose cognizable offences. Whether or not they are ultimately proved is a matter for investigation and trial. The rejection of the application on the basis of the police enquiry and previous animosity between the parties is, thus, unsustainable in law. 12. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 27.03.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Moradabad, is quashed and set aside. The matter CRLA No. 4274 of 2024 2 is remitted back to the Court below to reconsider the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. afresh in accordance with law and to pass a reasoned order, preferably within a period of one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. 13. With the above observations/directions, the instant criminal appeal is allowed. September 1, 2025 Ajeet CRLA No. 4274 of 2024 3 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- AJEET KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad