Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:32079 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2439 of 2025 Applicant :- Ankit Sharma And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Lavesh Sharma,Rakesh Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Gupta along with Sri Lavesh Sharma, learned counsels for the applicants and the learned A.G.A. 2. This Court on 24.01.2025, required the learned A.G.A. to serve notice upon O.P. No.2. There is a compliance affidavit dated 14.02.2025 of A.G.A., in which in paragraph-4, it has been asserted that the notice upon O.P. No.2 has been served on 13.02.2025. Till the dictation of the order, nobody has put in appearance on behalf of O.P. No.2. 3. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure preferred by the applicant for quashing the entire proceeding in Sessions Trial No.2256 of 2024 (State Vs. Sumit & others), pertaining to Case Crime No.0189 of 2024, under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC & Section 3(2) Va of SC/ST Act, as well as summoning order dated 16.11.2024, pending in the court of Special Judge SC/ST Act, Agra. 4. Learned counsels for the applicants have submitted that an FIR stood lodged on 09.04.2024, FIR No.0189 under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 504 IPC and under Section 3(2) Va of SC/ST Act by O.P. No.2 with the allegation that O.P. No.2 is an employee of one of the dairies, which is owned by one Mahesh Goswami. On 07.04.2024, when the O.P. No.2 had gone to realize money in lieu of the milk so supplied, then the applicants hurled caste-based abuses on the road, public view, and threatened that they will not pay the said amount and the applicants should call the owner of the dairy being Mahesh Goswami. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that when Mahesh went there, then he was administered beating, pursuant where to injuries were sustained. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that already applicants have also filed first information report on 09.04.2024 under Sections 147, 148, 323, 341, 352, 506 IPC relatable to the commission of offence on 07.04.2024 against Mahesh Goswami against 20-25 others. Learned counsel for the applicants thus submits that first of all the incident took place in the night that too on road, but it cannot be said that it comes within the definition of public view. He further submits that even the applicant faction has also sustained injuries and it is nothing but a counter blast. He further submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated and invoking the power under Section 106/107, proceedings were also initiated against the applicants as well as the opposite party no.2. 5. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that from the narration of the allegation contained in the FIR and the injury report, which is at page-14-A relatable to Mahesh Goswami, as many as 9 injuries is said to be sustained, however, with respect to injury no.2, 5, 6, it was sent for X-ray and CT-scan and nothing was found, would not be a ground to hold that the applicants are innocent. 6. Having heard learned counsels for the applicants as well as the learned A.G.A., I am of the opinion that no interference is warranted in the facts and circumstance of the case, particularly when the FIR narrates the allegation, which shows the commission of the offence. Interestingly, it has not been disputed that the applicant belongs to SC/ST category and further injuries are also apparent as per the injury report. Cross-FIR itself justifies the existence of the incident dated 07.04.2024. Even otherwise this Court has not to take into consideration the defences, as the stage has not yet arrived, as the stage would only arrive, when the trial commences, wherein the applicant can plead and show that they are innocent in this regard. 7. In view of aforesaid, the application is rejected. 8. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant submits that a direction be issued for consideration of the bail. 9. This Court has no reason to disbelieve that in case applicant moves appropriate proceedings before the court below for enlargement of bail, then the same may be decided with most expedition in accordance with the law of the land. Order Date :- 6.3.2025 N.S.Rathour (Vikas Budhwar, J) Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad