Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:101222 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD (Sl. No.40) Court No. - 78 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 37476 of 2024 Applicant :- Nagendra Tiwari And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Mani Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J. 1. Heard Sri Sanjay Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Vinay Kumar Singh, learned AGA appearing for the State. 2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the summoning order dated 16.10.2023 and the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 2365 of 2022 (Ram Ashish Tiwari vs. Nagendra Tiwari and others) under Sections 323, 504, 427, 452, 379 IPC, P.S. Kaptanganj, District Kushinagar, pending in the court of Civil Judge (S.D.) / Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar, place Padrauna. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in the alleged incident, the applicants have also sustained injuries and the FIR has also been lodged with regard to the same by the applicant no.1. As a counterblast to the said FIR, the opposite party no.2 has filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. after 19 days of the incident, which was later on vide order dated 05.03.2022 was directed to be treated as a complaint case and thereafter, after recording the statement of the witnesses, the applicants herein have been summoned vide order dated 16.10.2023 for the offence under Sections 323, 504, 427, 452, 379 IPC. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid summoning order, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the instant case is nothing but a counterblast case lodged by the opposite party no.2 and in fact the opposite party no.2 was the aggressor in the instant case. Therefore, he seeks quashing of the entire proceeding as well as the summoning order dated 16.03.2023. 4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State submits that there is presence of the applicants in the incident and both sides have sustained injuries. Thus, it cannot be said that a prima facie case is not made out against the applicants herein. Who is the aggressor, cannot be decided in the proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and that can be decided during the trial of the case. Therefore, there is no illegality in the summoning order. 5. Having heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that from the record of the case, it is apparent that there is no dispute between the parties, on 25.11.2021, some incident has taken place and in the same, both the parties have sustained injuries. However, who was the aggressor that has to be decided during the trial of the case. Since the FIR was registered only on behalf of the applicants and not on behalf of the opposite party no.2, who has filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., which was latter on directed to be treated as a complaint case and the trial court after recording the statements under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., summoned the applicants vide order dated 16.10.2023 6. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the learned Magistrate has rightly taken cognizance, therefore, no interference is required in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and the instant application is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed in the light of judgments of Apex Court in R. P. Kapoor Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 S.C. 866; State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 : 1992 SCC (Cri) 426] and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others : 2021 SCC OnLine SC 315. Order Date :- 1.7.2025 Ashish Pd. (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHISH PRASAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad