Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Dharma Devi vs Sandeep Kumar on 20 April, 2026
Author: J.K. Maheshwari
Bench: J.K. Maheshwari
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2026
(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 6657 of 2025)
DHARMA DEVI … APPELLANT
VERSUS
SANDEEP KUMAR & ORS. … RESPONDENTS
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. In the instant appeal the order dated 05.12.2024 passed
by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal
Appeal No. 8105 of 2023 is under challenge.
3. The respondents were allegedly made accused for the
charge under Section 147, 148, 452, 323, 504 506 and 354-Kha
of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 3(2)(5)ka of
the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, the ‘Prevention of
Atrocities Act’) allowing the application under Section 319 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure by the Trial Court vide order
dated 28.7.2023.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
Gulshan Kumar Arora
Date: 2026.04.22
4.
17:29:16 IST
Reason: Being dissatisfied, appeal was preferred under Section 14-
A of the Prevention of Atrocities Act which was allowed by the
2
impugned order of the High Court setting aside the order of
the Trial Court.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant in reference to Section
14-A of the Prevention of Atrocities Act submits that against
an order of summoning the accused by allowing the application
u/s.319 of CrPC, is an interlocutory order against which
appeal under Section 14-A does not lie. Therefore, the
jurisdiction exercised by the High Court allowing the appeal
and to set aside the order, is without authority to entertain
the appeal.
5A. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent
though made an attempt to support the judgment of the High
Court, but not in a position to controvert the submissions of
the appellant, however, requested to issue appropriate
directions.
6. After hearing and on perusal of Section 14-A, it is clear
that an appeal shall lie from any judgment/sentence and order
not being an interlocutory order, if any, passed by the
special court or an exclusive special court notwithstanding
anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure before
the High Court on the facts and law both. After perusal of
the order, it is clear, the order impugned of the Trial Court
summoning the respondents as an accused by allowing the
3
application under Section 319 is an interlocutory order.
Therefore, the appeal filed under Section 14-A is not
maintainable.
7. Accordingly, on the said ground itself, by allowing the
appeal, the order passed by the High Court stands set aside.
We make it clear that setting aside of the order in appeal
would not debar the respondents to take recourse as
permissible. It is further made clear that the period spent
by the respondents during pendency of the appeal and in the
proceedings before this Court may be condoned as per Section
14 of the Limitation Act. We also make it clear that the
observations made in the order passed by the High Court which
is set aside and shall not influence the merit of the
contentions, if any, advanced by the parties on filing the
Revision or 482 petition and the High Court shall decide the
issue afresh uninfluenced by the findings made in the order
impugned.
8. Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of. Pending
applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
……………………………………………………,J.
[J.K. MAHESHWARI]
……………………………………………………,J.
4
[ATUL S. CHANDURKAR]
New Delhi;
April 20, 2026.
ITEM NO.32 COURT NO.3 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 6657/2025
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-12-2024
in CRLA No. 8105/2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature at
Allahabad]
DHARMA DEVI Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
SANDEEP KUMAR & ORS. Respondent(s)
(IA No. 169855/2025 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)
Date : 20-04-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ATUL S. CHANDURKAR
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Aarti Upadhyay Mishra, AOR
Mr. Harsh Som, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sri Narayan Shukla, Adv.
Mr. pradeep Kumar Shukla, Adv.
Mr. Gaurav Singh, AOR
Mr. Agrata Singh, Adv.
Mr. Adarsh Upadhyay, AOR
Ms. Pallavi Kumari, Adv.
Mr. Shashank Pachauri, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appeal stands disposed of in terms of the signed order.
Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
5
(GULSHAN KUMAR ARORA) (NAND KISHOR)
DEPUTY REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(Signed order is placed on the file)
