Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:36181 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1838 of 2025 Appellant :- Ram Abhilakh @ Ram Abhilash And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ashish Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. In view of the order, which is proposed to be passed today, notice to respondent No.2 is hereby dispensed with. 3. Under challenge in this appeal is the impugned summoning order dated 13.05.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (S.C./ S.T. Act), Balrampur in Complaint Case No.48 of 2024 titled Ajay Kumar vs. Raksharam and others, under Sections 323, 504 I.P.C./ 115(2), 352 B.N.S. and Sections 3(1)(Dha) and 3(2)(v)(ka) S.C./ S.T. Act., Police Station Maharajganj Tarai, District Balrampur. 4. Foremost contention of learned counsel for the appellants is that the impugned summoning order is not in conformity with the statement of the complainant recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and statements of witnesses recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C. His further submission is that the learned trial Court while passing the impugned summoning order has failed to appreciate the fact that the complainant's version of the incident, as stated in the complaint, is not substantiated by the statement of the complainant recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and the statement of witnesses recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C. Thus, he has contended that even prima facie no offence is disclosed against the appellants, despite this fact, they have been summoned to face the trial which is nothing but malicious prosecution and an abuse of the process of the Court. Therefore, he prays to set aside the impugned summoning order passed by the trial court. 5. Learned counsel for appellants has restricted his argument and submits for issuing direction for bail in view of the law rendered by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, LL 2022 SC 577, decided on 11.07.2022. 6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of appellant. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by learned counsel for appellants as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record, there appears no illegality in the order passed by trial court, therefore, no interference is required in this case. In case appellants move an application for bail before the learned trial court within a period of three weeks from today, it shall be heard and decided in view of law rendered by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil’s case (supra). 8. With the aforesaid, the appeal is disposed of finally. [Subhash Chandra Sharma, J.] Order Date :- 24.6.2025 cks/- Digitally signed by :- CHANDRA KANT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench