HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6928 of 2024 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A for the State, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 as also perused the record. 2. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred to set aside the impugned charge sheet dated 26.02.2024 as well as cognizance order dated 28.05.2024 passed by Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Bijnor in Session Case No.745 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No.18 of 2024, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 376, 420, 406 IPC and Section 3 (2) (v) SC/ST Act (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station Chandpur, Didstrict Bijnor. 3. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case just to pressurize and harass the appellant, in fact, no such incident has taken place. The applicant has never committed any offence as alleged against him. Further submission is that no offence against the appellant is disclosed and the court below has utterly failed to consider as no prima facie case is made out against the appellant. He also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention. 4. Per contra, the learned AGA opposed the appeal and submitted 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 Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Dileep Kumar Singh, Rohit Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Rajesh Tripathi, Vijay Prakash Chaturvedi Pramod Sharma .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) having no force is liable to be dismissed. 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.I.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. 6. The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid cognizance order as well as charge sheet are hereby refused. 7. Accordingly, the instant criminal appeal is dismissed. September 16, 2025 Ajeet CRLA No. 6928 of 2024 2 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- AJEET KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad