Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:3025 Court No. - 16 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 350 of 2025 Applicant :- Sandeep Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Kumar Yadava,Ram Suphal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for respondent nos.1,3 and 4. Notice to respondent no.2 is dispensed with in view of the proposed order. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. read with Section 528 BNSS 2023 has been filed by the applicant with the following prayer:- "The applicant named above most respectfully begs to submit that for the facts, reasons and circumstances stated in the accompanying affidavit, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Rae Bareli for reconsidering and deciding the complaint case No- 1716/2016 for summoning the opposite parties no-3 under section-218, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 474, 477 and 466 I.P.C, and adding the Sections-218, 419, 467, 468, 471, 474, 477 and 466 I.P.C against the opposite party no-2 after calling the final Inquiry report from the opposite partyno-4, in the interest of justice. An order or direction may be passed by this Hon'ble Court to submit the final Inquiry report in Complaint Case No-1716 of 2016 (Sandeep Versus State of U.P and Others) pending before The Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Raebareli fixing any stipulated period. Any other order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of applicant." Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned summoning order is bad in law in as much as the accused persons should be summoned in additional Sections of Indian Penal Code also such as Section 218, 419, 467, 468, 471, 474, 477 and 466 Indian Penal Code. He further submits that from perusal of the complaint complicity of respondent no.4, Commissioner Transport Department, U.P. is prima facie evident, therefore, he should have also been summoned. Perused the record. Perusal of the record shows that vide the impugned summoning order dated 7.9.2024 the court while going through the complaint as well as the material on the record so also the statements under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and Section 202 Cr.P.C., in detail, has found prima facie case against accused Ram Balak and has summoned him. So far as adding or altering sections in the summoning order is concerned, learned trial court can alter or add any charge at any time before the judgement is pronounced in exercise of power under Section 216 Cr.P.C., thus, for this relief the accused can take recourse Section 216 Cr.P.C. So far as additional accused is concerned the applicant can take recourse during trial at the stage of Section 319 Cr.P.C. and if the applicant wants any party to produce any document or any further evidence or to summon any witness that exercise can be done by the learned trial court on an application of prosecution under Sub-section 2 of Section 244 Cr.P.C, thus, adequate remedies are provided in the Code. In view of the above, the application is disposed of. The applicant can take recourse to those remedies during trial. Order Date :- 17.1.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench