HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 7498 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1.Heard learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Om Prakash Shukla holding brief of Sri Alok Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 2.This Criminal appeal under Section 14-A (1) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, (in short of 'the SC/ST Act) has been preferred by the appellants with the prayer to set aside/quash the charge sheet dated 19.10.2024 as well as cognizance and summoning order dated 1.4.2025 along with the entire proceeding in Session Case no. 333 of 2025, (State Vs. Banti and others), arising out of Case Crime no. 263 of 2024, under Section 121 (1). 132 of B.N.S. and 3 (2) Va SC/ST Act, P.S. Jaithra, District Eta which is pending in the court of Special Judge SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Etah. 3.The contention of the learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. 4.From the perusal of the 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 applicant. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions 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.IR. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Rajendra Prasad Pandey, Rakesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Banti And Another .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192, and 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 before the court below and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court. 5.The prayer for quashing the entire proceeding as well as impugned summoning order of the aforementioned case is refused. 6.With the aforesaid observations this criminal appeal is dismissed. .... September 1, 2025 A. CRLA No. 7498 of 2025 2 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- AFAQ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad