Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:29102 Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4085 of 2025 Applicant :- Nokhe Lal Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Janendra Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. By means of present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the petitioner has challenged the summoning order dated 5.3.2025 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge/ Special Judge SC/ST Act, Lakhimpur Kheri, in Complaint Case No. 27 of 2023 "Asha Devi Vs. Nokhe Lal and others", under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1) D, Dha, & 3(2)5-A of SC/ST Act, Police Station Haidarabad, District Lakhimpur Kheri. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that opposite party no.2 has filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the Additional District Judge-II, District Kheri. A police report was also called for and after considering the statements under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. the impugned order has been passed summoning the petitioner. 4. As according to the complaint it has been stated that on the date of incident i.e. 10.8.2022 at around 8.00 p.m. all the accused persons who are nine in number including the petitioner started illegally digging the boundary wall of the house of the complainant and they entered into the said house illegally and started abusing the complainant and also used caste related words. Apart from the above, the allegation extends to physically assaulting the complainant and also damaging the house and property and also taken away Rs. 20,000/- cash. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the said complaint is false and misconceived, in as much as, the petitioner has filed a Suit for Permanent Injunction against the husband of the complainant in the court of Civil Judge, (S.D.), Kheri in the year 2011 and it is only out of vengeance the present proceedings has been initiated. Accordingly he submits that on this ground alone the proceedings deserves to be quashed. 6. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that the proceedings initiated by the petitioner were in the year 2011 and it cannot be said that after a lapse of 12 years the opposite party no.2 has filed a false complaint under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1) D, Dha, & 3(2)5-A of SC/ST Act. 7. It is further submitted that it would be defence of the petitioner which can be raised before the trial court at the appropriate stage. As per the complaint on 10.8.2022 the accused persons including the petitioner has forcibly entered into the house of the complainant and assaulted her and used caste related words. The petitioner has supported the case of the prosecution even in the statement under Section 200 and there was sufficient material available on record as per Section 202 Cr.P.C. 8. Accordingly the petitioner has been summoned in the said proceedings. It is further noticed that at the stage of summoning the petitioner has to see as to whether from the sufficient material available on record any cognizable offence is made out or not? 9. Accordingly, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order passed by the trial court, various material considered before passing of the summoning order. Issues raised before this Court are defence which are liable to be raised at the appropriate stage. It is further noticed that merely because 12 years prior permanent injunction against the husband of the complainant cannot be a ground to presume the allegations levelled are false and misconceived. 10. Accordingly, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. The petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. . (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 16.5.2025 Muk Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench