Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:39884 Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5514 of 2025 Applicant :- Shailendra Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajnish Kumar,J. Heard Sri Ravindra Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that respondent no.2 has filed a complaint Case No.248/23 alleging that a group photograph with a caption was made viral by the applicant from his mobile phone on the whatsapp group of Gram Sabha Sarai Kalyan with an objectional comment. The applicant is not a member of that group. However, on coming to know, he contacted to the respondent no.2 for deleting the same, on which he scolded him and threatened him. He has neither stated in his complaint nor in his statement under Section 200 Cr.P.C. that Hari Prasad was with him when he met to the respondent no.2 for deleting the same but Hari Prasad was produced under Section 202 Cr.P.C. and he stated that he had gone with the applicant to respondent no.2 to delete the same. Considering the same and that the presence of Hari Prasad could not be proved and the copy of the video clip has also not been placed on record, the complaint was dismissed. However, on revision the impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded on the ground that Hari Prasad has stated that he was present and in regard to the video clip the revisional court observed that the trial court may form opinion as may be considered by it and remanded the matter. On remand, without considering the complaint in the light of the direction issued by the revisional court, the trial court passed the impugned order and issued the summoning order summoning the applicant under Sections 500, 504 and 506 I.P.C., whereas no case is made out against the applicant. Even otherwise, the submission is that the property dispute is already going on between the parties on account of the sale deed got executed by the respondent no.2 from the mother of the applicant and the respondent no.2 who are real brothers, suit for cancellation of which has been filed by the applicant before the concerned court. However, since the applicant has a remedy of revision, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, dismiss this application with liberty to the applicant to avail the appropriate remedy as available under law. Order Date :- 14.7.2025 Akanksha Sri/- Digitally signed by :- AKANKSHA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench