HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8573 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1.Heard learned counsel for the appellants 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 the summoning order dated 22.7.2025 passed by the learned court of Special Judge, (SC/ST Act), Jaunpur along with charge sheet dated 12.7.2025 as well as entire proceeding of Special Session Trial No. 276 of 2025, (State Vs. Satish @ Banerji and others), arising out of Case Crime no. 97 of 2025, under Section 110, 115 (2), 352, 351 (2) of B.N.S. and 3 (2) (va) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Sigramau, District Jaunpur pending in the Court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jaunpur. 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) : Om Prakash Vishwakarma Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Satish Kumar Alias Benerji Kharwar And 3 Others .....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 impugned order as well as entire proceeding of the aforementioned case is refused. 6. However, it is provided that if the appellants appear and surrender before the court below and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in accordance with law. 7.With the aforesaid observations this Criminal appeal is finally disposed off. September 23, 2025 A. CRLA No. 8573 of 2025 2 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- AFAQ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad