Kiran vs State Of U.P. And 10 Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 10736 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Kiran vs State Of U.P. And 10 Others on 17 September, 2025

Author: Shekhar Kumar Yadav

Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:165894
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 
 
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8365 of 2025   
 
   Kiran    
 
  .....Appellant(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State Of U.P. And 10 Others    
 
  .....Respondent(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Appellant(s)   
 
:   
 
Bijay Singh Sachan   
 
  
 
Counsel for Respondent(s)   
 
:   
 
G.A.   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 83
 
   
 
 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.      

1. Heard Mr. Bijay Singh Sachan, learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

2. This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A(1) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant for setting-aside the impugned judgment and order dated 18.06.2025 passed by learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Kanpur Nagar in Complaint Case No. 694/2024 (Kiran Vs. Mohit and others), Police Station- Juhi, District- Kanpur Nagar where complaint of the appellant has been rejected by the learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Kanpur Nagar, under Section 203 Cr.P.C./226 B.N.S.S.-2023.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the court below has failed to appreciate facts and law placed before it. It is further submitted that the appellant is complainant in the present case and he has filed a complaint on which the trial court recorded t he statement of the complainant under Sections 200 Cr.P.C. wherein he has supported the contents of the complaint, even then the complaint filed by the appellant has been dismissed. Hence, this Criminal appeal, with above, prayer, for setting aside impugned order and, thereby, directing court below for proceeding in accordance with law.

4. Learned AGA, representing State of U.P., has vehemently opposed the prayer. It is submitted that court below has rightly dismissed the complaint. As such, court below has neither committed a jurisdictional error in passing the order impugned nor it has exercised it's jurisdiction with material irregularity warranting interference by this Court.

5. I have gone through the the impugned order. The Court below has returned a finding that on going through the complaint and the statements recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C., there exist no ground to summon the accused on the alleged facts and circumstances of the case, hence no case for summoning the accused is made out.

6. In view of the above, this Criminal appeal, being devoid of merits, deserves to be dismissed and it stands dismissed accordingly at this stage.

(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)

September 17, 2025

Krishna*