JUDGMENT :

Umesh Chandra Sharma, J.

1. Heard Sri Syed Imran Ibrahim, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Pankaj Kumar Tripathi, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been moved to quash the summoning order dated 10.11.2022 arising out of Special Case No. 70 of 2019 - (Amar Singh Vs. Rakesh Mishra and others) under Sections 323, 427, 504, 506 I.P.C & Section 3 (1) X, of the Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station Highway, district Mathura as well as all consequential proceedings of Case No. 70 of 2019, pending in the Court of Special Judge, SC/ST At, Mathura.

3. In brief, the facts of the case are that opposite party no. 2, Amar Sigh, the complainant moved an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C to lodge an F.I.R under the aforesaid Sections against the applicants in respect of commission of crime at 09:00 a.m on 28.07.2019 with the allegations that the applicant and four five other persons armed with Lathi, sticks and other weapons reached at his land, broke the boundary wall through a J.C.B Machine and caused a loss of Rs.50,000/-. When they were prevented they abused, saying the applicant and his brother to be Chamar Dherh and assaulted the complainant and his brother.

4. The complainant ranged up 100 number and when police reached on the spot, they scrapped giving threatening to their life. The 100 number police carried the complainant and his brother Kundan Singh, Kedar Singh at the P.S. where the complainant presented a written complaint, but the Highway P.S. did not take any action in the matter. The accused persons are the Gunda and miscreants, who want to occupy the complainant’s land by dint of his muscle power. The applicant also moved a complaint to S.S.P, Mathura on 31st July, 2019, and again sent an application on 13.08.2019 to S.S.P, Mathura and other superior authorities but no action was taken, hence application u/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C was moved.

5. The aforesaid application was converted into complaint. The statement of the complainant was recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. The statements of P.W. 1 Kundan Singh, P.W. 2 Kedar Singh and P.W 3 Vinod Kumar were recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C. On 10.11.2022, the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Mathura, summoned the applicants under Sections 323, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C and Section 3 (1) Da Dha of the S.C/S.T Act, for their appearance on 16.12.2022.

6. Being aggrieved, the accused applicants have preferred this Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At the time of hearing, the learned A.G.A raised an objection that in view of the Full Bench Judgement of this Court passed in Gulam Rasool Khan & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors. Criminal Appeal No. 1000 of 2018 on 28.07.2022, (appeal can be preferred u/s Section 14-A of the S.C./S.T Act), this petition is not maintainable. By this application basically the summoning order has been challenged, which is appealable.

7. Contrary to that the learned counsel for the applicant relying on several judgments, which are discussed herein argued that the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C is maintainable against the order passed by the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act) even in cases wherein an order has been passed under the S.C. S.T Act.

8. It would be proper to mention Section 14-A of the SC/ST Act, which is here in below :-

"14A. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973, an appeal shall lie, from any judgment, sentence or order, not being an interlocutory order, of a Special Court or an Exclusive Special Court, to the High Court both on facts and on law.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (3) of section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, an appeal shall lie to the High Court against an order of the Special Court or the Exclusive Special Court granting or refusing bail.

(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, every