Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:18939 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 914 of 2025 Appellant :- Ram Mohan Verma And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of. U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Diwakar Prasad Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Diwakar Prasad Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellants and the A.G.A. for the State. 2. By means of the present appeal under Section 14 A (1) of the Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 the petitioners have challenged order dated 23.10.2024 passed by Special Judge, S.C./S.T.(P.A.) Act, Shravasti in complaint case No.61 of 2022 (Sangeeta Devi Vs. Ram Mohan Verma) wherein the trial court has summoned the accused/petitioners under Sections 323, 504 IPC and 3(1) (Dha) of S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are accused in complaint case No.61 of 2022 preferred by opposite party No.2 in the court of Special Judge S.C./S.T.(P.A.) Act, Shravasti. In the complaint it has been alleged that on 30.6.2022 at 3.00 P.M. the petitioners came to the house of the complainant armed with lathi and danda and started abusing the complainant and when the husband of the complainant came out of the house they assaulted and abused him and also disrobed the complainant. The complainant and her husband received injuries. The said incident was witnessed by number of persons of the village. 4. The trial court considering this statement of the complainant under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. and also looking into the injury report was of the view that prima facie commission of offence is made out and accordingly has issued summons. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the impugned order is illegal and arbitrary in as much as there is pre - existing dispute between the petitioners and opposite party No.2 and the complaint of the complainant are false.. Mischievous and false allegations have been leveled only because of the previous enmity. 6. Learned A.G.A., on the other hand, has opposed the petition and submits that there was sufficient matterial on record before the trial court to have exercised its discretion in summoning the accused and accordingly prayed for dismissal of the case. 7. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. 8. From a perusal of the contents of the complaint and statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. clearly and unequivocally a prima facie case against the petitioners is made out under the aforesaid Sections in as much as on the date of the incident i.e. 30.6.2022 they had come to the house of the complainant armed with lathi and danda and had used caste related words and when the husband of the complainant came out of the house he was assaulted due to which he received injuries. The injury report has also been perused by the trial court while issuing summons. At the stage of issuing summons the material available on record has to be examined and the defence, if any, of the accused is not required to be dealt with at this stage nor is it available on record for consideration by the trial court. 9. In the considered opinion of this Court, the Magistrate at this stage has been given undoubted wide discretion in the matter which is to be judicially exercised by it and once the Magistrate has exercised his discretion in a judicious way it is not justified even for the High Court to substitute its own discretion for that of the Magistrate or to indulge itself into the exercise of examining the case on merits. In this regard following observations have been made by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Nagawwa Vs. Veeranna Shivalingappa Konjalgi and others, reported in (1976) 3 Supreme Court Cases 736 which is as under:- "The Magistrate has been given an undoubted discretion in the matter and the discretion has to be judicially exercised by him. Once the Magistrate has exercise his discretion it is not for the High Court, or even this Court, to substitute its own discretion for. that of the Magistrate or to examine the case on merits with view to find out whether or not the allegations in the complaint, if proved, would ultimately end in conviction of the accused. These considerations, in our opinion, are totally foreign to the scope and ambit of an inquiry under s. 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which culminates into an order under s. 204 of the Code." 10. Accordingly, this Court finds no ground to interfere in the said matter and the defence of the appellants, if any, can be considered by the court concerned at appropriate stage. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed being devoid of merit. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 4.4.2025 RKM. Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench