JUDGMENT Aditya Nath Mittal,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned AGA and perused the record. 2. This petition has been filed with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 12.08.2013 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate- II Rae Bareli in Complaint Case No.234 of 2013 under sections 406/500 IPC, P.S. Jayas, District Rae Bareli. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the whole of the story is false and concocted and the opposite party no.2 has not spent any money. 4. Learned AGA has defended the impugned order. 5. By order dated 12.08.2013, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the evidence on record, the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Rae Bareli had summoned the petitioners for the offence punishable under sections 406 and 500 IPC. 6. The order dated 12.08.2013 was challenged in Criminal Revision No.199 of 2015 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Court no.6 Rae Bareli who after considering all the evidence on record has dismissed the revision. 7. First of all, because the remedy of revision against the summoning order dated 12.08.2013 has already been exhausted and the petitioners were not able to get any relief, therefore, the same order again cannot be challenged under section 482 Cr.P.C. 8. As far as the merits of the case are concerned, the complainant has narrated whole of the incident regarding the settlement of the marriage and at this stage, there is no reason to disbelieve the evidence adduced by the complainant. 9. Learned trial court while passing the impugned summoning order has considered the evidence on record and the summoning order is based on the evidence on record supported by cogent reasons. The revisional court has considered the said order and the revisional court was of the view that there is no illegality or perversity in the summoning order. 10. After perusal of the record, I am also of the view that there is no perversity or illegality in the summoning order. The petition is dismissed.