Allahabad High Court

BABLOO SINGH AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 7 April 2026
Bench: MADAN PAL SINGH

Holding

The Court held that the matter requires further evidence and therefore stayed coercive action pending a detailed hearing.

Summary

The appellants, Babloo Singh and two others, filed a criminal appeal challenging a complaint lodged against them under Sections 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act, along with several IPC offences. The complaint alleged that an incident occurred on 20‑07‑2023 inside the house of the second respondent, O.P. No. 2, and was presented as a retaliatory measure against the appellant’s pending Section 138 NI Act case. The appellants contended that the alleged act was not committed in public view, invoking the Supreme Court’s decision in Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand, and argued that the complaint was false, malicious and an abuse of process. The State opposed the claim and sought continuation of the proceedings. The Court, after hearing counsel, granted the State three weeks to file a counter‑affidavit and ordered that no coercive steps be taken against the appellants pending further hearing. The order is interim, leaving the substantive issues for determination on a later date.

Issues considered

Whether the alleged offence under the SC/ST Act was committed in public view as required by law.
Whether the complaint is a false and malicious proceeding intended to pressure the appellants.
Whether the proceedings constitute an abuse of the process of law.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 354, 392, 452, 504, 506
Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 138
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha), 3(2)(va)

Subjects

SC/ST Act
public view requirement
abuse of process
Section 138 NI Act
interim order
criminal appeal

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 11360 of 2025

Babloo Singh And 2 Others
.....Appellant(s)
Versus

State of U.P. and Another
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s) : Ashok Kumar Mishra, Nagendra
Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Shailendra Kumar Rai

Court No. - 51
HON'BLE MADAN PAL SINGH, J.

1. Heard Sri Nagendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellants,
Sri Shailendra Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2,
learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the entire complaint
case has been instituted as a counter blast to the proceedings initiated by
appellant no. 1 under Section 138 of the N.I. Act after dishonour of
cheque of Rs. 4,00,000/- issued by O.P. No. 2, and the allegations made
in the complaint are false, concocted and motivated with malafide
intention to pressurize the appellants. It is further contended that even as
per the own version of the complaint, the alleged incident dated
20.07.2023 is said to have taken place inside the house of O.P. No. 2
within the four walls, in absence of any independent public witness, and
therefore the essential ingredient of “public view” as required under the
provisions of the SC/ST Act is completely missing; hence, no offence
under Sections 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha) and 3(2)(Va) of the SC/ST Act is
made out. Reliance in this regard has been placed upon the law laid down
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand,
(2020) 10 SCC 710, wherein it has been categorically held that an offence
under the SC/ST Act is not made out unless the alleged act is committed
in a place within public view. It is thus argued that the continuation of
criminal proceedings against the appellants is nothing but an abuse of the
process of law and the impugned summoning order deserves to be
CRLA No. 11360 of 2025
2

quashed.

3. Learned A.G.A. prays for and is allowed three weeks' time to file
counter affidavit. Rejoinder, if any, may be filed within two weeks
thereafter.

4. List thereafter.

5. Till then, no coercive steps shall be taken against the appellants in
pursuance of the Complaint Case No. 59 of 2023, under Sections 323,
354, 392, 452, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha) and 3 (2)(va) of
SC/ST Act.

(Madan Pal Singh,J.)
April 22, 2026
pks

Digitally signed by :-
PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…