Allahabad High Court
INDAL SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- MADAN PAL SINGH
Holding
The appeal to quash the charge‑sheet and summoning order is dismissed as no ground for quashing or abuse of process is established.
Summary
The appellant, Indal Singh, appealed to the Allahabad High Court seeking to quash a charge‑sheet dated 15 March 2017 and a summoning order dated 4 July 2025 issued by the Special Judge under the IPC and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The appellant alleged that the prosecution was instituted mala fide to harass him and that no offence was made out. The Court held that none of the Supreme Court‑recognised grounds for quashing a complaint or proceeding were satisfied and that there was no abuse of process. Consequently, the appeal to quash the charge‑sheet and summoning order was refused. The Court permitted the appellant to appear before the trial court within 20 days through counsel to move an application for discharge, and ordered that no coercive measures be taken against him during that period.
Issues considered
- Whether the charge‑sheet and summoning order can be quashed on the ground of mala fide prosecution.
- Whether there is an abuse of the process of the Court justifying quash of the proceedings.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 504, 506
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(1)(da), 3(1)(ha), 3(2)
Subjects
- criminal procedure
- quash of charge‑sheet
- summoning order
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act
- abuse of process
- discharge of accused
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1317 of 2026
Indal Singh
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s) : Gokaran Singh, Ram Lakhan
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Pramod Kumar
Court No. - 51
HON'BLE MADAN PAL SINGH, J.
1. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State in the Court today is taken on
record. Learned counsel for the appellant does not wish to file any rejoinder
affidavit to the said affidavit.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. The present appeal has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated 15th
March, 2017 and the summoning order dated 4th July, 2025 passed by
Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Azamgarh in Criminal Case No. 650 of 2025
(State Vs. Indal Singh), arising out of Case Crime No. 57 of 2017, under
Sections 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3 (1) (da), 3 (1) (ha) and 3 (2)
VK of the S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station-Raunapar, District-Azamgarh.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that no offence is made out
against the appellant and that the present prosecution has been instituted with
a mala fide intention to cause harassment.
4. In the absence of any of the grounds recognized by the Supreme Court
which may justify the quashing of the complaint or the impugned proceedings,
the prayer for quashing the same is refused, as no abuse of the process of the
Court is made out. The summoning court is vested with sufficient powers to
discharge the accused even before the stage of framing of charges, if, for
reasons to be recorded, it considers the charge to be groundless.
5. As requested, the appellant is permitted to appear before the concerned
court within 20 days from today through counsel and move an application
seeking discharge.
6. No coercive measures shall be adopted against the appellant for a period of
20 days from today or till the filing of the discharge application, whichever is
earlier.
CRLA No. 1317 of 2026
2
7. If the concerned court, after hearing the counsel for the accused, is
persuaded to take the view that the accused ought not to have been
summoned and that the charge is groundless, it shall not abstain from
discharging the accused merely on the ground that the material available at
the time of summoning is the same as that available at the time of
consideration of the discharge application.
8. On the other hand, if the court, after hearing the counsel for the accused,
holds the view that the accused has been rightly summoned and that the
material on record does not indicate the charges to be groundless, it shall
pass an order to that effect and proceed further in the matter in accordance
with law. It shall also be at liberty to adopt such measures as are permissible
in law to secure the presence of the accused.
9. With the aforesaid observations, this appeal stands disposed of.
May 7, 2026
Sushil/-
(Madan Pal Singh,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…