Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:122222 Court No. - 78 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 36702 of 2024 Applicant :- Seema Devi And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Gyanamati Bind,Mritunjay Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J. 1. Heard Sri Mritunjay Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Vinay Prakash Sahu, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants seeking quashing of the entire criminal proceedings including the impugned judgment and order dated 09.08.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court, Second, Jaunpur, in Criminal Revision No.90 of 2024(Seema Devi and others Vs. State of U.P. and Another) as well as bailable warrant dated 17.01.2024, passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Third, Jaunpur alongwith summoning order dated 26.04.2022 passed by the learned Civil Judge(Junior Division)/F.T.C., Jaunpur, in Case No.572 of 2020, Reg. No.14174(Daan Bahadur Vs. Harilal and Others), under section 323, 504, 506, 427, 452 of IPC, Police Station Badlapur, District Jaunpur pending in the court of learned Additional Civil Judge(Senior Division)-II, Jaunpur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that for the same incident an FIR was lodged on the date of incident itself by the applicant no.7 against the opposite party no.2 and other. As a counter blast of the same the instant complaint case has been lodged by the opposite party no.2 to put a pressure upon the applicants herein. Therefore, learned counsel for the applicants submits that the instant complaint case is nothing but a counter blast case, thus it is a malicious prosecution on the part of opposite party no.2, therefore, he seeks quashing of the entire proceeding of the instant case. 4. Per contra, learned AGA for the State submits that both the parties are admitted the date and timing of the incident. Both the parties have their own versions of the incident. In para-2 of the complaint it has been stated that there was some property dispute between the parties, due to which the applicant herein came to the house of the opposite party no.2 and assaulted them. In the FIR it is stated by the applicant no.7 that opposite party no.2 with other accused persons had assaulted them. Therefore, who was the aggressor in the incident can not be determined while exercising the power under section 482 Cr.P.C. Therefore, learned AGA for the State submits that no interference is call for by this Court in the instant case. 5. Having heard the rival submissions so made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the record of the case. From the record it is apparent that for an incident dated 04.09.2020 an FIR was lodged by the applicant no.7 against the opposite party no.2 and others for the offence under sections 323, 504, 506, 188 IPC. For the same incident a complaint case was also lodged by the opposite party no.2 on 28.09.2020 making out a categorical allegations that the applicants were the aggressor and assaulted the opposite party no.2 and others family members, due to the property dispute between them. The allegations as made in the complaint are duly supported by the statement of the complainant and the witnesses recorded under section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., therefore, a prima-facie case is made out against the applicants herein, whereby vide impugned order dated 26.04.2022 the trial court has summoned the applicants herein for facing trial. 6. In view thereof a prima-facie case is made out against the applicants herein from the complaint as well as from the statements of complainant and witnesses, therefore, this Court do not find any good reason to entertain the instant application and the same is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 24.7.2025 VKG Digitally signed by :- VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad