HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 7818 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1.Sri Chandra Kant Tripathi, Advocate has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 is taken on record. 2.Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 3.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 appellant with the prayer to set aside/quash the impugned summoning order dated 21.12.2020 passed by Special Judge, (SC/ST Act) Sant Kabir Nagar in Complaint Case No. 66 of 2020, (Matti Devi Vs. Rudranath), under Section 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC and 3 (1) (Da), 3 (1) (Dha) SC/ST Act, P.S. Belhar Kalan, District Sant Kabir Nagar as well as entire proceeding of above complaint case. 4.The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant 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. 5.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 Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Ram Pravesh Yadav, Swatantra Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Rudranath .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) 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 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. 6.The prayer for quashing the impugned order as well as entire proceeding of the aforementioned case is refused. 7.With the aforesaid observations this Criminal appeal is dismissed. September 10, 2025 A. CRLA No. 7818 of 2025 2 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- AFAQ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad