HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39305 of 2024 Court No. - 81 HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the record. No one is present on behalf of opposite party no.2. 2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the summoning order dated 04.10.2024, passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Atrauli, Aligarh, in Complaint Case No. 129 of 2024, Veerpal Singh v. Hariom, under Sections 323 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Palimukeempur, District Aligarh as well as the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case. 3. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the applicant that on 15.02.2024, the grandfather of the applicant had lodged a First Information Report against the opposite party no.2 as Case Crime No. 81 of 2024 under Sections 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. Opposite party no.2 filed the present compliant regarding the incident dated 19.03.2024 against the applicant whereas no such incident occurred at that time. The applicant had not beaten the opposite party no.2. The applicant is a student and this compliant has been filed with false and baseless allegations just to spoil his career. The opposite party no.2 got himself examined under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and witnesses Teekam Singh and Narendra Kumar under Section 202 Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate has not taken into consideration the statements of complainant and witnesses properly and summoned the applicant under Sections 323 and 506 I.P.C., whereas no prima facie case is made out against the applicant, therefore, the summoning order as well as entire Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ravi Shanker Rawet Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vikram Shah Sisodia Hariom .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) proceedings of the aforesaid case may be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that from the perusal of the allegations made in the complaint, the statements of the complainant and witnesses and the material collected during the course of investigation, prima facie offence is clearly made out against the applicants and as such, entire proceedings cannot be quashed. 5. As per record, opposite party no.2 filed a compliant against the applicant regarding the incident dated 19.03.2024 in which he has made an allegation that the applicant has abused and beaten him. The opposite party no.2 got himself examined under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and witnesses Teekam Singh and Narendra Kumar under Section 202 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate has summoned the applicant under Sections 323 and 506 I.P.C. 6. From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant. All the submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of power conferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to quash the aforementioned case, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused. 8. Accordingly, the application is dismissed. March 25, 2026 Vijay A482 No. 39305 of 2024 2 (Chawan Prakash,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIJAY KUMAR SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad