Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37890 Court No. - 27 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1745 of 2016 Applicant :- Sita Ram And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home And Anr. Counsel for Applicant :- Ratnesh Chandra,Pratibhan Yadav,Santosh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Praveen Tripathi Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been preferred with the following main prayer:- " Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to :- i) quash the impugned order dated 26/02/2016 passed by Additional Session Judge, Court No. 2, Ambedkar Nagar in criminal case no. 85 of 2014 in case crime no. 92A/12 (wrongly typed as 29A/12) under Section 323, 504, 506 of Indian Penal Code and 3(1)(x) The Schedule Castes and The Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Police Station Alapur, District Ambedkar Nagar and allow the application dated 30/10/2015, a copy of which is contained in Annexure-10 to this Application." 3. The brief facts of the case are that an F.I.R dated 09.08.2012 was lodged against the applicants under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C and Section 3(1)(x) of S.C/S.T Act, alleging therein that the applicants had physically assaulted the nephew of the informant and uttered caste related slur. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants have falsely been implicated in the present case by respondent no. 2. It is further submitted that it was the respondent and his family members who attacked the family of the applicants and physically assaulted them. Against the said act, an F.I.R, on the very same day, was lodged by the applicants against the respondent no. 2 and other family members and in the said case, the chargesheet has been filed. 5. It is further submitted that as a counterblast, the F.I.R has been lodged by respondent no. 2 against the applicants who belonged to the same family. It is further submitted that there is a dispute, pertaining to the land, pending between the parties before the competent court of law and it is an outcome of the same. The present dispute is of civil nature which is being given a colour of criminal case. 6. On the other hand, learned A.G.A and learned counsel for respondent no. 2 has submitted that the F.I.R was lodged by both the parties on the very same date which shows that there was an occurrence of the incident. The medical report/injury reports of both the sides show that both the parties had assaulted each other physically due to which both the parties had sustained injuries, meaning thereby that the incident had occurred, but, who was the aggressor of the said incident could only be ascertained by leading of an evidence, which cannot be led before this court in the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the records of the case, it is found that the incident had occurred, but who was the aggressor of the same cannot be seen in the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C, as it requires adducing of an evidence. 8. In view of the facts and circumstances mentioned hereinabove, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C is devoid of merits hence dismissed. Order Date :- 4.7.2025 DiVYa Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench