HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3112 of 2026 Court No. - 51 HON'BLE MADAN PAL SINGH, J. Heard Sri Ganesh Shanker Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A. for the State, and perused the entire record. Despite service of notice, none has appeared on behalf of opposite party no. 2. 1. This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A(1) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred to quash the summoning order dated 19.07.2025 as well as the entire proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No. 445 of 2021, arising out of Case Crime No. 23 of 2019, under Sections 147, 323, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(Da) of the SC/ST Act. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants contends that the entire prosecution case is inherently contradictory and has been falsely fabricated due to ulterior motives. It is submitted that the F.I.R. was initially lodged against unknown persons with a vague allegation of assault arising out of a dispute during a marriage ceremony, without any reference to caste-based abuse. However, in the subsequent statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the informant materially improved his version by introducing a new story alleging caste- related inquiry and assault, and further claiming identification of the appellants through CCTV footage. This material contradiction between the F.I.R. and later statements clearly demolishes the credibility of the prosecution case. It is further argued that no test 3. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Ashwini Kumar, Ganesh Shanker Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Amay Pandey And 3 Others .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) identification parade was conducted, despite the appellants being strangers residing at a distance of more than 30 kilometers, thereby rendering their alleged identification doubtful and legally unreliable. The implication of the appellants is thus alleged to be at the instance of the marriage hall owner, owing to personal and ulterior considerations. It is further contended that the medical evidence does not support the prosecution version, as the injuries sustained by the informant are simple in nature, with two injuries being mere complaints of pain and the CT scan report showing no abnormality. This indicates that the alleged incident has been exaggerated and falsely projected. Moreover, the essential ingredients to attract the provisions of the SC/ST Act are not satisfied, as there is no evidence to show that the alleged offence was committed on the ground of the informant belonging to a Scheduled Caste. In support of this submission, reliance has been placed upon the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Dasrath Sahu vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Masumsha Hasanasha Musalman vs. State of Maharashtra, wherein it has been held that the offence must be committed specifically on the basis of caste to attract Section 3(2)(v) of the Act. Hence, the continuation of proceedings against the appellants is liable to be set aside. 4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the appeal and submitted that, from a perusal of the charge-sheet and summoning order, it cannot be said that no offence under the SC/ST Act is made out against the appellants. 5. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and have carefully perused the entire record, including the First Information Report, charge-sheet, and the statements of the informant and other witnesses recorded during the investigation. 6. From the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the appellants and upon perusal of the record, it prima facie appears that there are material contradictions and improvements in the 7. CRLA No. 3112 of 2026 2 prosecution case. The First Information Report does not contain any allegation of caste-based abusive language, nor does it assign any specific role to the appellants. The medical evidence indicates only simple injuries. These aspects, coupled with the admitted background of personal dispute between the parties, create serious doubt about the veracity of the prosecution case, particularly insofar as the offences under the SC/ST Act are concerned. The materials collected during investigation do not disclose that the alleged acts were committed on account of the caste of the informant or with the intention to humiliate or intimidate him solely because he belongs to a Scheduled Caste. 8. It is well settled that for attracting the provisions of Section 3(1)(Da) of the SC/ST Act, the prosecution must prima facie establish that the accused intentionally insulted or intimidated the victim with the intent to humiliate him on the ground that such person belongs to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, and that such act was committed in a place within public view. 9. In the present case, there is not even a whisper in the First Information Report or in the statements recorded during investigation to show that the appellants acted with the requisite mens rea to humiliate the informant on the basis of his caste. Mere use of abusive language or involvement in a scuffle, without the foundational requirement of caste-based intent, does not attract the rigours of the SC/ST Act. 10. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand, (2020) 10 SCC 710, has categorically held that an offence under the Act is not established merely on the ground that the informant is a member of a Scheduled Caste, unless there is an intention to humiliate such person on account of his caste. 11. Applying the aforesaid settled legal principles to the facts of the present case, it is manifest that the essential ingredients of the offences under the SC/ST Act are wholly absent. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Pappu Singh Vs. State of U.P. 2002 Cri. L.J. 12. CRLA No. 3112 of 2026 3 1251 has held that simply addressing a person by his caste without any intention to insult or intimidate does not constitute offence under the SC/ST Act. Continuation of the criminal proceedings against the appellants under the provisions of the SC/ST Act would, therefore, amount to an abuse of the process of law. Accordingly, the cognizance/summoning order dated 19.07.2025, insofar as it relates to offences under Section 3(1)(Da) of the SC/ST Act, is liable to be quashed and is hereby quashed. However, the proceedings in respect of offences under Sections 147, 323, and 504 I.P.C. shall continue in accordance with law. 13. In view of the aforesaid, the present criminal appeal is partly allowed. 14. April 28, 2026 pks CRLA No. 3112 of 2026 4 (Madan Pal Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad