Allahabad High Court

KOMAL @ KANHAIYA AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 28 September 2026
Bench: ABDUL SHAHID

Holding

The appeal is dismissed as there is no prima facie case for quashing the proceedings.

Summary

The appellants challenged a summoning order issued by the Special Judge under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in a case involving alleged offences under the IPC, POCSO Act and the SC/ST Act. The FIR listed six accused, but the charge sheet named only three adults, with the remaining juveniles referred to the Juvenile Justice Board. The victim’s medical report showed a minor lacerated wound and pain, and her statements were recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the CrPC. The appellants argued that there were serious contradictions and improvements in the victim’s statements, seeking to quash the proceedings. The High Court held that the investigation was complete, the charge sheet filed, and that a detailed factual appraisal was for the trial court; consequently, no prima facie case existed to quash the order. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether the summoning order under the SC/ST (P.A.) Act should be quashed on the ground of contradictions in the victim’s statements
Whether a prima facie case exists to warrant interference with the investigation and charge sheet

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 180, 183
Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 191(2), 352
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 7, 8
SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha), 3(2)(va)

Subjects

SC/ST Act
Summoning order
Quash proceedings
Prima facie case
Criminal procedure
Victim statement contradictions
Appeal

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

                 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6962 of 2026

Komal @ Kanhaiya And 2 Others
                                                              .....Appellant(s)
                                   Versus
State of U.P.
                                                            .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s)        : Sanjay Yadav, Satya Prakash Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s)       : G.A., Shashi Prakash Pandey, Shubham
                                  Pandey

Court No. - 90
                     HON'BLE ABDUL SHAHID, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for opposite party
no. 2/first informant, and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present appeal has been filed against the impugned summoning order
dated 23.05.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act,
Bulandshahr in Sessions Case No. 1936 of 2026 (State v. Komal @
Kanhaiya and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 483 of 2025, under
Sections 191(2), 115(2), and 352 B.N.S., and Sections 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha),
and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Police Station Khurja Dehat, District
Bulandshahr.

3. The genesis of the case is that the F.I.R. was registered under Sections
191(2), 74, 115(2), and 352 B.N.S., Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act, and
Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act. The complainant filed the F.I.R. against
six accused persons, namely, Vikas, Devesh, Komal, Chhaviram, Jeetan, and
Vishal. After investigation, the charge sheet was filed under Sections 191(2),
115(2), and 352 B.N.S., and Sections 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha), and 3(2)(va) of the
SC/ST Act.

4. No offence under Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act was found; hence, it was
dropped. The charge sheet was filed against (1) Komal, (2) Jeetan alias
Jitendra, and (3) Vishal, whereas the juveniles Vikas, Devesh, and
Chhaviram were referred to the Juvenile Justice Board, Bulandshahr.

5. According to the medical report, the victim suffered a lacerated wound of
1.5 cm x 2.5 cm x specified over right which is 7 cm from right ear. She also
                                                                                              CRLA No. 6962 of 2026
                                                                    2


                                    complained of pain in her right shoulder, though no visible injury mark was
                                    found. An internal examination report of the victim is also on record. The
                                    statements of the complainant and the victim were recorded under Section
                                    180 B.N.S.S., and subsequently, the victim's statement was recorded under
                                    Section 183 B.N.S.S.

                                    6. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that there are serious
                                    contradictions and improvements in the statements of the victim and other
                                    witnesses recorded under Sections 180 and 183 B.N.S.S.

                                    7. However, the investigation has been completed and the charge sheet has
                                    been filed. A detailed and minute appreciation of the facts can only be done
                                    by the learned trial court at the stage of trial. At this stage, no prima facie
                                    case for quashing the proceedings has been made out.

                                    8. In view thereof, the present appeal is liable to be dismissed and is
                                    dismissed accordingly.

                                    September 29, 2026
                                    K.K. Maurya
                                                                                               (Abdul Shahid,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
KAMLESH KUMAR MAURYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…