HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 9995 of 2026 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA for the State. 2. The present criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant with a prayer to set aside the impugned order dated 30.4.2026 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gautam Budh Nagar in Complaint Case No.1169 of 2023 (M/S Prakash Pharmacy (Proprietor Smt. Mamta) vs. Manohar Lal), P.S.- Kasna, Greater Noida, District- Gautam Budh Nagar, whereby the complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C. of the appellant/applicant has been rejected. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Magistrate has erred in rejecting the complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C. without properly appreciating the allegations contained in the complaint and the statements of the complainant and witnesses recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. It is submitted that the accused had purchased medicines worth Rs.3,85,780/-, against which only Rs.1,02,900/- was paid, and when the outstanding amount was demanded, the accused abused and assaulted the complainant. It is further submitted that the material placed on record disclosed sufficient grounds for proceeding against the accused, but the learned Magistrate has erroneously treated the dispute as merely a business or civil dispute. The impugned order, therefore, suffers from illegality and material irregularity and is liable to be set aside. 4. Learned AGA, opposing the appeal, submits that the learned Magistrate has rightly rejected the complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C. after Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Pushpa Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. M/S Prakash Pharmacy .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) considering the complaint and the statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. It is submitted that the material on record does not disclose any specific casteist remark or allegation that the complainant was insulted or humiliated on account of her caste. It is further submitted that admittedly no injury was caused to the complainant and the allegations essentially arise out of a dispute concerning payment of money in a business transaction. Thus, no sufficient ground was disclosed for proceeding against the accused under the alleged penal provisions. The impugned order calls for no interference and the appeal is liable to be dismissed. 5. Upon consideration of the material available on record, it transpires that the appellant, M/s Prakash Pharmacy, through its proprietor Smt. Mamta, having shop No. 34, Kali Charan Market, Kasna, Greater Noida, District Gautam Buddha Nagar, instituted the complaint against the accused, Manohar Lal. The substance of the allegation is that the accused had purchased medicines worth Rs.3,85,780/- from the complainant. During the course of the business transaction, the accused paid a sum of Rs.1,02,900/-, whereas the remaining amount remained unpaid. It is alleged that when the outstanding amount was demanded, the accused used derogatory words against the complainant and caused injury to her. It is admitted fact that the complainant did not sustain any injury in the alleged incident and that the case is, in fact, one in which no injury was caused. It is further evident from the complaint that no specific casteist slur has been attributed to the accused. Moreover, in the statement of the complainant recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. during the course of inquiry before the learned Magistrate, there is no allegation that any casteist remark was made with an intent to insult or humiliate the complainant on the ground of her belonging to SC/ST category. The statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., when considered in conjunction with the averments contained in the complaint, do not disclose the necessary foundational facts constituting the alleged offence under the SC/ST Act. 6. On an overall consideration of the averments contained in the complaint and the statements recorded during the inquiry, it appears that the genesis of the dispute lies in the business transaction between the CRLA No. 9995 of 2026 2 parties concerning payment of the outstanding amount towards the medicines purchased by the accused. The allegations, therefore, essentially arise out of a business and monetary dispute. The material on record does not disclose any specific allegation of caste-based insult or humiliation so as to attract the penal provisions invoked by the complainant. The attempt to give a criminal colour to what essentially appears to be a dispute arising out of a business transaction cannot, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, be sustained. 7. For the reasons recorded above, this Court finds that the learned trial court has rightly rejected the complaint of the appellant/applicant. The impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity warranting interference in appellate jurisdiction. 8. The instant appeal, being devoid of merit, stands dismissed. 9. Registrar (Compliance) is directed to serve a copy of this order by FAX/e-mail to the court concerned through District & Sessions Judge concerned within one week. October 1, 2026 RA CRLA No. 9995 of 2026 3 (Santosh Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAZIQ ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad