HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 7686 of 2026 Court No. - 90 HON'BLE ABDUL SHAHID, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. None is present for the opposite party. 2. The present appeal has been filed against the impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 24.12.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jaunpur, in S.S.T. No. 391 of 2024 (State vs. Ramesh Singh), arising out of Case Crime No. 319 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 352, and 351(2) of the B.N.S. and Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act, Police Station Sujanganj, District Jaunpur. 3. There are cross-cases. One is the F.I.R. challenged in the present criminal appeal, which is registered as Case Crime No. 319 of 2024, and the other F.I.R. is registered as Case Crime No. 320 of 2024. 4. In the present F.I.R., the incident is shown to have occurred on 23.08.2024 at 20:30 hours, and the F.I.R. was lodged with a delay of eight days on 31.08.2024 at 17:10 hours. On the other hand, the cross F.I.R. (Case Crime No. 320 of 2024) records the incident as having occurred on 23.08.2024 at 22:15 hours, and the F.I.R. was registered on 31.08.2024 at 18:08 hours. 5. In the said incident, both the parties had sustained injuries. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant has raised two primary contentions: (1) no offence under the SC/ST Act is made out from the contents of the Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Karuna Chaturvedi, Reeta Kumari, Sonali Sharma Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Santosh Kumar Ramesh Singh And Another .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) F.I.R.; and (2) the place of the incident is altogether different. 7. Upon a perusal of both F.I.R.s, it appears that the incidents occurred on the same day, 23.08.2024, at approximately 20:30 hours, and both parties sustained injuries. Who the aggressor was in the said offence is a matter to be determined at the time of trial. 8. The contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant regarding the place of the incident is a matter of evidence and can only be examined during the trial. However, regarding the second contention, there is no material or basis to show that the appellant used any caste-based remarks with the intention to humiliate as the same is not reflected in the F.I.R., which was lodged after a delay of eight days. 9. In view thereof, no offence is made out under Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act. Hence, the cognizance/summoning order dated 24.12.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jaunpur, is hereby quashed to that extent, and the impugned order dated 24.12.2024 is modified accordingly. 10. The present appeal is allowed in part. September 23, 2026 K.K. Maurya CRLA No. 7686 of 2026 2 (Abdul Shahid,J.) Digitally signed by :- KAMLESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad