Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:30732 Court No. - 79 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 15873 of 2024 Petitioner :- Asharam And 3 Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar,Ram Badan Maurya Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned AGA for the State. 2. By means of present petition, petitioners have challenged order dated 23.09.2024 passed by learned District and Sessions Judge, Mainpur in Criminal Revision No.72 of 2023 as well as order dated 05.04.2023 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Court No.7, Mainpuri in Complaint Case No.48 of 2021 (Chhabi Nath Vs. Asharam and others), under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Kishni, District Mainpuri. 3. Brief facts of the present case are that respondent no.2 preferred a complaint case against petitioners before learned court concerned with regard to incident dated 28.07.2019 that at about 7.00 AM when respondent no.2 was irrigating his field, petitioners/accused persons came and beaten respondent no.2 by fists and kicks and also one accused, namely, Abhishek opened fire but respondent no.2 saved himself. Thereafter respondent no.2 was medically examined on 02.08.2018 and according to injury report, injuries received by respondent no.2 were simple in nature. After registration of complaint case, learned court concerned recorded the statements under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. and on the basis of said statements and material available on record, summoned the petitioners under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC vide its order dated 05.04.2023. Being aggrieved with the summoning order dated 05.04.2023, petitioners preferred Criminal Revision No.72 of 2023 and the same was dismissed by learned revisional court vide order dated 23.09.2024 which impugned the present petition. 4. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that there is a land dispute persisting between the parties and the same is pending in shape of Civil Suit No.269 of 2004 and the present case has falsely been preferred at the behest of respondent no.2 only to make pressure upon the petitioners. Learned counsel for petitioners further submitted that medical examination was conducted by respondent no.2 after five days of the alleged incident and as per injury report, all the injuries sustained by respondent no.2, were simple in nature but without considering the said facts, learned court concerned illegally summoned the petitioners. It has also been apprised by learned counsel for petitioners that there is hardly any attraction of sections in which the petitioners have been summoned and all these grounds have not been taken into consideration while passing the order dated 05.04.2023. Learned counsel for petitioners further submitted that the revisional court has also repeated the same illegality while passing the impugned order dated 23.09.2024 through which revision preferred by petitioners challenging the order dated 05.04.2023, has been rejected. Learned counsel for petitioners further contended that both the orders passed by the courts concerned, are against the weight of evidence and as such, the same may be quashed. 5. Per contra, learned AGA for the State vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant petition on the ground that both the impugned orders have been passed after considering the material available on record which are just and proper. 6. After having the rival contentions raised by learned counsel for parties as well as perusal of the order impugned dated 05.04.2023, it is evident that the court concerned after considering each and every aspect of the matter and the statements recorded under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. as well as medical report which was corroborating the incident, has rightly summoned the petitioners and the same reasoning has also been given by learned revisional court while dismissing the revision preferred at the behest of petitioners and as such, it cannot be said that the learned court concerned as well as learned revisional court have acted without application of mind, the reasoning given by both the courts concerned, are just and proper. 7. In view thereof, the petition lacks merit and is hereby dismissed. Order Date :- 4.3.2025 Vivek Kr. Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad