HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4897 of 2026 Court No. - 51 HON'BLE MADAN PAL SINGH, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A for the State and perused the entire record. 2. This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A (1) of The Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 18th April, 2026 as well as entire proceedings of Special Sessions Case No. 580 of 2026 (State Vs. Arvind & Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 18 of 2026 under Sections 323, 110, 352, 351 (2), 324 (2), 117 (2), 127 (2), 3 (5) B.N.S. and Section 3 (2) (va) of SC/ST Act, Police-Station- Teelamod, District-Trans Hindon, Commissionerate Ghaziabad, pending in the Court of Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Ghaziabad. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that against the present appellant, no offence under Section 3 (2) (va) of SC/ST Act is made out, as the injured or the informant has not stated anything against them in the first information report or in the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., even they do not made any allegation of threatening being made against them not. The entire allegations of beating up the injured and abusing by using caste indicated words, made in the first information report as well as in the statements of injured, informant and other witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. are against the co-accused Lalit. From the first information report and the statements of the witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. it transpires that no allegation has been made against the appellants that they have abused the informant/injured by using caste indicated words. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that moreover, the incident in question has occurred inside the house i.e. within the wall. Therefore, as per the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Hitesh Verma v. State of Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Abhinav Kesarwani, Kaushal Mishra, Sarvashva Thakur, Sunil Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Indrajeet Kumar Shukla Arvind Kumar And 2 Others .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) Uttarakhand, (2020) 10 SCC 710, if the injured was beating up and abused by using caste indicated words inside a wall, no offence the provisions of S.C./S.T. Act wold be attracted. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that so far as the allegation of threatening to injured or opposite party no.2 is concerned, the said allegation has been made against Lalit and her sister, namely, Shakshi only. In the first information report and in the statement of injured recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., no allegation of beating up the injured or of abusing him by caste indicated words by the present appellants. On the above premise, learned counsel for the appellants urges that the impugned summoning order dated 18th April, 2026 against the appellants under Sections 3 (2) (va) of SC/ST Act bet set aside. 5. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant/opposite party no.2 have opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants. They submits that the incident as alleged by the informant has not been disputed. The injury report of the injured has also not been disputed. Therefore, prima facie case for the alleged offence is made out against the appellants. 6. On the above premise, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and the learned A.G.A. submit that since the trial court while passing the summoning order has not committed any gross error, therefore, the present criminal appeal is liable to be dismissed. 7. I have considered facts and circumstances of the case, 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 investigation. 8. From perusal of the instant first information report as well as statements of informant and injured, it is crystal clear that the alleged incident occurred inside the house of the informant. In the first information report as well as in the statements of injured and informant under under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the entire allegations of beating upt the injured, abusing him by using caste indicated words and threatening him to kill him, have been assigned to Lalit and his sister Shakshi only. Neither the allegations of threatening to kill the injured nor abusing him by using caste indicated words nor beating him have been assigned to present appellants. Apart from the above as per version of the first information report and the statements of witnesses, the incident occurred inside the house of the informant. 9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand, (2020) 10 SCC 710, has categorically held: CRLA No. 4897 of 2026 2 "Offence under the Act is not established merely on the fact that the informant is a member of a Scheduled Caste unless there is an intention to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe for the reason that such person belongs to such caste." 10. Applying the aforesaid settled legal principles to the facts of the present case, it is manifest that the essential ingredients of the offences under Section 3 (2) (va) of S.C./S.T. Act is wholly absent against the appellants. 11. Continuation of the criminal proceedings against the appellants under the provisions of Section 3 (2) (va) of S.C./S.T. Act would, therefore, amount to abuse of the process of law. The summoning order dated 18th April, 2026 as well as entire proceedings against the appellants, so far as it relate to offence under Section Sections 3 (2) (va) of S.C./S.T. is unsustainable in the eyes of law and the same is, hereby, quashed. Remaining proceedings of Special Sessions Case No. 580 of 2026 (State Vs. Arvind & Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 18 of 2026 under Sections 323, 110, 352, 351 (2), 324 (2), 117 (2), 127 (2), 3 (5) B.N.S. will continue against appellants as the same is affirmed by this Court. 12. In view of the aforesaid, this criminal appeal is partly allowed. May 18, 2026 Sushil/- CRLA No. 4897 of 2026 3 (Madan Pal Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad