HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5777 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A for the State as well as 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 set- aside the impugned summoning order dated 12.04.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge, (SC/ST ACT) Sant Kabir Nagar, in Complaint Case No. 84 of 2019 (Malti Devi Vs. Braj Kishor Singh) arising out of Case Crime No. 2553 of 2017, under Sections 376, 323, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Ghanghata, District- Sant Kabir Nagar with a further prayer to stay further proceedings of the aforesaid case. 3. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that no offence against the appellant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with malafide intentions for the purposes of harassment. 4. Per contra, the learned AGA opposed the appeal and submits that the victim has fully supported the prosecution story. He further submits that at the stage of summoning the accused, the Magistrate/Court dealing with the matter is required to apply judicial mind only with a view to take cognizance of the offence to find-out as to whether prima-facie case has been made out to summon the accused or not. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. Hence, the appeal having no force is liable to be dismissed. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Manish Gupta, Prateek Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Neha Rani, Ramesh Chandra, Roop Nath Yadav, Satyvendra Singh Yadav, Uday Singh Yadav Brij Kishor Singh Alias Braj Kishor Singh .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) 5. From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the appellant. All the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.L.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para- 10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge as the case may be, before the court below and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court. 6. The prayer for quashing the proceedings of case as well as cognizance/summoning order is refused. 7. Accordingly, the criminal appeal is dismissed. September 16, 2025 Krishna* CRLA No. 5777 of 2025 2 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad