HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9531 of 2025 Court No. - 14 HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. This application has been filed with the following prayer:- "To quash the impugned summoning order dated 11.01.2024 passed by Civil Judge (SD) FTC-II, District- Pratapgarh arising out Case Crime No. 221/2023 U/s 147, 307, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station- Jethwara, District- Pratapgarh (State Vs. Khursheed Alam & Others), it relates to the applicant which is contained as annexure no.1 to this petition." 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not present at the time of incident, even then, he was implicated on the basis of confessional statement of other co-accused persons. He further submits that the plea of alibi of the applicant was also not considered by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation and the charge- sheet was submitted in the most mechanical manner, on which, cognizance was also taken by learned trial Court. He next submits that the applicant has been implicated on the basis of village enmity, hence, indulgence of this Court is required. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dinesh Kumar Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Khursheed Alam .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of the applicant and submits that the plea of alibi of the applicant cannot be considered at this stage. He further submits that the relevant evidence, which are placed before this Court, were neither given to the Investigating Officer nor placed before learned trial Court by way of moving application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. read with 107 of U.P. Police Regulation. He next submits that the plea of alibi of the accused can be considered at the appropriate stage by giving opportunity to produce defense evidence, hence, the application is liable to be dismissed. 6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the plea of alibi of the applicant cannot be considered at this stage. The applicant was named in the F.I.R. and the charge-sheet was submitted on the basis of evidence collected by the Investigating Officer. Therefore, no interference is required. 7. With above observations, the application, being misconceived, is dismissed. November 25, 2025 Arpan A482 No. 9531 of 2025 2 (Rajeev Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench