Allahabad High Court
Dinesh Kumar Pal And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 6 April, 2026
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Neutral Citation No. - 2026:AHC:73206 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 11849 of 2025 Dinesh Kumar Pal And 3 Others .....Petitioner(s) Versus State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mohit Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Court No. - 89 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.K.Singh, learned AGA for the State are present.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for a direction to set aside the impugned order dated impugned order dated 12.08.2025 passed by Additional Session Judge Court no.8, Farrukhabad in Criminal Revision No.40 of 2025 (Dinesh Kumar Pal and others versus Omkar Guddupal and another) and impugned summoning order dated 21.01.2025 passed by Additional Civil Judge, (Senior Division) Farrukhabad in Complaint Case No. 8631 of 2024 (Omkar & Guddu versus Dinesh Kumar Pal and others), under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506 IPC related to Police Station Muhammadabad, District Farrukhabad.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated by the private respondents in Complaint Case No. 8631 of 2024 (Omkar @ Guddu vs. Dinesh Kumar Pal and another). It was submitted that the statements of the complainant and his witnesses were recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., and a perusal thereof reveals material inconsistencies and contradictions, indicating that a false and concocted story has been set up to implicate the petitioners on account of a land dispute, for which a civil suit is also pending between the parties. It was further submitted that the alleged incident, as stated in the complaint case, is said to have taken place on 17.05.2024 at about 6-7 pm, whereas an NCR in respect of the same dispute had earlier been lodged by the petitioners themselves on 28.05.2025. The said fact of lodging of NCR by the petitioners against the private respondents also finds mention in the complaint version. It was also submitted that the complainant himself has admitted that proceedings under Sections 107/116 Cr.P.C. were initiated against both the parties, which further indicates that the petitioners have been falsely implicated.
4. Learned counsel further submitted that the courts below have failed to properly consider the inconsistencies and contradictions in the statements of the complainant and his witnesses recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C.
5. Learned AGA submitted that both parties have proceeded against each other by lodging NCR and filing complaint cases. The initiation of proceedings against both parties under Sections 107/116 Cr.P.C. prima facie demonstrates that the alleged incident did take place. It was further submitted that the disputed questions of fact cannot be adjudicated at this preliminary stage, and the trial court, upon due consideration of the statements of the complainant and his witnesses, has rightly summoned the petitioners to face trial for offences under Sections 323, 324, 504, and 506 IPC.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. This Court finds that the courts below have duly considered the statements of the complainant and his witnesses recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. No perversity or illegality is found in the findings so recorded. It is well settled that while exercising jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, this Court does not interfere with findings of fact recorded by the courts below unless such findings are perverse or contrary to the material available on record. In the present case, no such ground is made out for interference.
7. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
(Anil Kumar-X,J.) April 6, 2026 Ujjawal