Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:111536 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD (Sl. No. 9) Court No. - 78 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 41231 of 2024 Applicant :- Bira Alias Bira Ram And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Singh Yadav,Bhoodev Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J. 1. Heard Sri Bhoodev Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Rajesh Kumar Gupta, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the entire criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1646 of 2020 (CNR No. UPMA040057023020) (Dulari Devi vs. Bira @ Bira Ram and others) under Section 323, 504, 506 and 452 IPC, P.S.-Sarailakhanshi, District-Mau as well as the summoning order dated 8.6.25023. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that for the incident dated 21.11.2019, an FIR was lodged being Case Crime No. 0565 of 2019 on 21.11.2019 itself by Raju, son of applicant no. 2, against the opposite party no. 2 and her family members, in which charge sheet has already been filed and cognizance has also been taken. After registration of the FIR, the instant complaint case has been lodged by the opposite party no. 2 with regard to the same incident dated 21.11.2019 making out a false and concocted allegations against the applicants and in which the applicants have been summoned vide impugned order dated 8.6.2023. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the instant complaint case is nothing but a counterblast case on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 to create a defence in the case lodged by son of the applicant no. 2, therefore, he seeks quashing of the entire proceedings of the instant case. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. submits that so far as the incident dated 21.11.2019 is concerned both parties are admitting the incident and both the parties have filed cases against each other. Admittedly, there was a property dispute between the parties. In connection therewith the incident has taken place. Both the parties have their own version of the incident, which version is correction and who is the aggressor of the incident cannot be decided in proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and it can be determined only during the trial of the case. Therefore, no interference is called for in the instant case by this Court. 5. Having heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the records of the case. 6. From the record of the case, it is apparent that for an incident dated 21.11.2019, an FIR was lodged by the son of the applicant no. 2 against the opposite party no. 2 and her family members. For the same incident, the instant complaint has been filed by the opposite party no. 2 as the FIR on her behalf was not registered by the police. Since, both the parties are admitting the incident dated 21.11.2019 consequent to a dispute of property between them. Therefore, how the incident took place and who was the aggressor cannot be determined while exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., which requires a detail trial of both the cases. In view thereof, this Court do not find any good reason to interfere with the impugned summoning order. 7. Accordingly, the instant petition stands dismissed. Order Date :- 11.7.2025 Kirti (Anish Kumar Gupta, J.) Digitally signed by :- SMT KIRTI MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad