HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7951 of 2022 Court No. - 16 HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State- respondent. None has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party no.2 despite names of Shri Rakesh Kumar Mishra and Shri Shri Prakash Pandey, Advocate(s) have been shown as counsel for opposite party no.2 in the cause list. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed with a prayer to quash summoning order dated 04.05.2022 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Shrawasti (in short "trial Court") in Complaint Case No. 7317 of 2021, in "Rooprani Vs. Yashwant @ Sanjay Pathak & others" summoning the applicant No.1 U/S 354 I.P.C. and applicant No. 2 to 5 U/S 452/323 I.P.C. for facing Trial as well as criminal proceedings initiated against the applicant. It is a case of the applicants that the applicant no.2/Hanumant Pathak lodged an FIR on 11.06.2020 registered as Case Crime No. 0156 of 2020, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308 IPC at Police Station - Bhinga, District - Sravasti stating that Yashwant Pathak received serious injuries and the said FIR has been lodged against father of opposite party no.2 and other co- accused. In the said case, the charge-sheet has been filed against the father of opposite party no.2 and other co-accused. Out of retaliation and to settle personal score, the opposite party no.2 at the behest of her father filed complaint on 23.07.2021 making allegation of outraging her modesty. In receipt thereof, the statements under Section 200 Cr.P.C. of the complainant Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shaquiel Ahmad, Satyendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Rakesh Kumar Mishra, Shri Prakash Pandey, Varun Vishal Pandey Yashwant @ Sanjay Pathak And 4 Others .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) as well as of the witnesses under Section 202 Cr.P.C. were recorded and thereafter, the applicant No.1 and applicant No. 2 to 5 have been summoned under Section 354 I.P.C. and under Section 452/323 I.P.C., respectively. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that proceedings have been instituted out of malafide and are liable to be quashed. On the other hand, learned AGA for the State submits that after recording of the statements under Section 200 Cr.P.C. of the complainant as well as of the witnesses under Section 202 Cr.P.C., the applicants have been summoned. This Court cannot do a mini-trial and the matter is liable to be relegated to the trial Court. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. After going through the record, it is borne out that opposite party no.2 is daughter of Prahlad, who is one of the accused in FIR registered as Case Crime No. 0156 of 2020, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308 IPC, lodged by the applicant no.2 wherein allegations of maarpeet have been levelled and serious injuries have received that is why Section 308 IPC was invoked. It appears that to settle the personal score, the opposite party no.2, who is daughter of Prahlad, has filed complaint subsequently on 23.07.2021, the proceedings appear to be malice which is settled by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 wherein in paragraph 102.7 it has been held that where a criminal proceeding is manifestly filed with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance can be quashed. The entire proceedings arising out of complaint case appear to be false and fabricated and out of malafide intentions. Accordingly, application is allowed and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.7317 of 2021, detailed above, pending in the trial Court are hereby quashed qua the applicants. November 24, 2025 Mohit Singh/- A482 No. 7951 of 2022 2 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench