Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:39935 Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5503 of 2025 Applicant :- Bajrang Prasad Pathak @ Bajrang Pathak And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sachin Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri. Sachin Pandey, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Satyendra Srivastava, the learned A.G.A appearing on behalf of the State. 2. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants have challenged the validity of an order dated 31.05.2025 passed by learned Additional District and Session Judge, Court No.01, Sultanpur in Session Trial No. 1281 of 2022, whereby an application filed by the opposite party no.2 under Section 319 Cr.P.C has been allowed and the applicants have been summoned to face the trial. 3. The aforesaid case was instituted on the basis of an FIR lodged on 20.05.2021 against seven persons including the applicants, alleging that all the accused persons had beaten up the opposite party no.2/informant's son and when the informant, her husband and elder brother of her husband reached the spot, the accused persons assaulted them also with an axe and sticks. The informant's husband suffers serious injuries in his leg and head and he fell unconscious. The informant's son also suffered a serious head injury. The informant's younger daughter, elder brother of her husband and the informant herself also suffered injuries in the incident. 4. Initially, the Investigating Officer had submitted a chargesheet dated 01.07.2021 against five co-accused persons and the allegations levelled against the applicants were not found to be established. 5. After the informant was examined by the trial court as P.W.-1 and her husband Mata Prasad Pathak was examined as P.W.-2, an application was filed under section 319 Cr.P.C for summoning the applicants to face the trial, which has been allowed by the impugned order. 6. Assailing the validity of the aforesaid order, the learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants have been summoned without any satisfaction having been recorded by the trial court that in case the evidence that has come to light during trial remains unrebutted, it may lead to conviction of the applicants and without recording such a satisfaction, the applicants could not have been summoned to face the trial. 7. The learned counsel for the applicants next submitted that there are serious discrepancies in the statements of witnesses, which have been overlooked by the trial court while passing the impugned order. 8. The statements of P.W.-1 and P.W.-2 recorded by the trial court have been annexed with the application. P.W.-1 has stated in her cross-examination, that she, her husband and elder brother of her husband ran towards the spot of the incident after hearing the cries of her daughter and saw that all the accused persons were assaulting her son with sticks and Gadasa. When they reached there, the accused persons assaulted them also with sticks and Gadasa. The informant's husband Mata Prasad Pathak suffered injuries on his head, hands and legs. His elder brother suffered injuries on his hand, legs and back. The informant received injuries on her hand, back and neck. Her husband fell down due to which injuries suffered by him and fell unconscious. All the injured persons were taken to the District Hospital, Sultanpur, her husband was treated in the district hospital and the informant and other persons were given First Aid in Primary Health Center, Dhanpatganj and thereafter, they were also treated in the District Hospital, Sultanpur. Her husband remained unconscious for two days. 9. During cross-examination, P.W.-1 stated that after her FIR was registered, an FIR was lodged by accused Devendra Pathak @ Kariya also. She stated that no person from the side of Devendra Pathak @ Kariya had suffered any injury in the incident. She stated that in furtherance of the FIR lodged by Devendra Pathak@ Kariya, a case was pending against her husband and his elder brother. She had reached the spot of the incident within two minutes. The applicants had also reached the spot of the incident. She stated that her husband had fallen unconscious but she and her son had not fallen unconscious. P.W.-1 stated that a property dispute was going on between the parties. P.W.-2 Mata Prasad Pathak stated that all the accused persons, including the applicants had assaulted his son and his wife. His wife and his brother had suffered injuries in the incident. His brother had suffered a fracture in his hand, his son had suffered an injury in his head, he had fallen unconscious and had regained consciousness on the third day during treatment in the hospital. P.W.-2 has also admitted pendency of a civil suit regarding a property dispute between the parties. 10. In case the aforesaid statements remain unrebutted, they may lead to conviction of the applicants and in these circumstances, the trial court has not committed any error in summoning the applicants to face the trial under section 319 Cr.P.C. 11. Accordingly, the application lacks merit and the same is hereby dismissed. In case the applicants appears before the trial court and files an application for their release on bail, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law without being prejudice by this order. (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Order Date :- 14.7.2025 Preeti. Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench