HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9746 of 2025 Court No. - 16 HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. who appears on behalf of the State/Respondents. 2. This application has been filed with following main prayer:- "WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash the impugned order dated 10.09.2025 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge /FTC II, Ayodhya in Criminal Revision No. 194/2024, Raj Kumar and others and 01.06.2024 passed by the Judicial Magistrate III, in Complaint Case No. 109/2022 Pankaj Misra Versus Savitri Devi and others as contained in ANNEXURE NO. 1 and 2 to this petition and also quash the entire proceedings of the Complaint Case No.109/2022 Pankaj Misra Versus Savitri Devi and others pending before the Judicial Magistrate III Ayodhya and allow the instant petition in the interest of justice." 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that on the date of incident, the applicants were working in Ludhiana and they have not committed any offence. A strong plea of alibi has been taken by learned counsel for the applicants and has submitted that the applicants have been wrongly summoned by the court below. He has submitted that the court below did not apply its mind and passed the order in a mechanical manner. 4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has submitted that the statement under Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amit Prakash Sharma, Saurabh Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Raj Kumar And 7 Others .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Section 200 Cr.P.C. of the complaint was recorded, who has made specific allegations against the applicants, who assaulted along with other co- accused. It has been further submitted that the statement under Section 202 Cr.P.C. of Shanti Devi and Bishun Dev Tiwari has also been recorded, which indicates that there is serious allegation against the applicants. It has been submitted that this Court cannot look into the evidence at this juncture for which, trial is required. 5. After going through the record, I find that the summons have been issued after recording the statement under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. and it cannot be said that the offence is not made out. The trial court will look into the factual aspects for which evidences on record are to be adduced. There is no interference required in the order passed by the trial court as well as by the revisional court. 6. The application is devoid of merits. It is accordingly dismissed. November 18, 2025 Sachin A482 No. 9746 of 2025 2 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MEHROTRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench