HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 12222 of 2026 Court No. - 55 HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The petition is filed with the following prayers:- "a. to set a side the summoning order dated 26.07.2023 passed by Learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate Saharanpur in complaint case no. 791 of 2023 Tasveer Versus Ravikant and others, under section 324, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Nagal District Saharanpur as well as Judgment and order dated 20.12.2025 passed by Additional District and Session Judge Room, No. 9 Saharanpur in criminal revision no. 352 of 2024 Ravikant and others Versus State of U.P. and another. b. to set-a-side the further proceeding of complaint case no. 791 of 2023 Tasveer Versus Ravikant and others, under section 324, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Nagal District Saharanpur, pending in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.) / Judicial Magistrate Saharanpur." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is a dispute with regard to the land in question and a civil suit was decreed in favour of the petitioners, however, the respondent no. 2 went in appeal and appeal was allowed. Subsequent thereto, the respondent no. 2 approached the house of the petitioners and have assaulted. The petitioners have lodged the first information report on 27.3.2023. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that thereafter after one month respondent no. 2 has filed Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shubham Srivastava, Sunil Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Ravikant And 4 Others .....Petitioner(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) the complaint with the allegation that on 27.3.2023 the petitioners have assaulted and as a result of the same injuries have been sustained and injury report has been annexed. In the present case statement of the complainant and witnesses have been recorded. The summoning order was issued by the trial court against which a revision was filed and the revision has been rejected by the impugned order. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the dispute is with regard to the land in question and in order that the possession would be taken by the petitioners, the respondent no. 2 have assaulted the petitioners and as a result of the same the present false proceedings have been lodged. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that from the side of the petitioners there are two injured. 4. It is to be seen that in the present case there is a cross version of the incident while both the parties have sustained injuries as per learned counsel for the petitioners. Once there are serious allegation with regard to violation of law then the trial court and the revisional court committed no error in passing the impugned order. There is no infraction of jurisdiction by the trial court. The petition lacks merit and is dismissed accordingly. However, the petitioners would be at liberty to apply for bail before the court concerned in accordance with law. September 8, 2026 VMA A227 No. 12222 of 2026 2 (Vikram D. Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- VISHWA MOHAN ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad