Allahabad High Court
Bhupendra Singh Yadav vs State Of U.P. And Another on 5 November, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:172549
Court No. - 78
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26569 of 2024
Applicant :- Bhupendra Singh Yadav
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Agrahari,Kumar Ankit Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The instant application has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned charge-sheet dated 02.07.2023, cognizance order dated 23.02.2024 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2164 of 2024, titled State v. Umesh Kumar and others, arising out of case crime no.116 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 66(D) of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, P.S. Kotwali City, District Mirzapur, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is no substantive evidence against the applicant, and he has been falsely implicated based solely on the statement of co-accused persons with whom the applicant has a prior enmity. The applicant works at his brother's shop, which is engaged in selling urea and other agricultural products. Learned counsel further submits that no offence under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act is made out, as the facts of the case do not involve forgery of any valuable security, property, or document.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer and submits that there is serious allegations of creating forged mark-sheet and certificates against the applicant. The applicant is a member of the gang which creates forged mark-sheets and certificates.
5. In the instant matter, the submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant call for determination on questions of fact which may be adequately adjudicated upon only by the trial court. Adjudication of questions of facts and appreciation of evidence or examining the reliability and credibility of the version, does not fall within the arena of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In view of the material on record it can also not be held that the impugned criminal proceeding are manifestly attended with mala fide and maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.
6. From perusal of cognizance as well as summoning order, no such illegality, perversity or any other substantial error could be pointed out, so as to warrant any interference by this court in view of judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal; 1992 SCC (Cr.), 426. Further, on examination of material brought on record, it's prima facie establish that the applicant is a member of a gang which creates forged mark-sheets and certificates for applying government job. The ingredients of Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 66(D) of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, are satisfied, therefore, no case for quashing of entire proceedings as well as impugned summoning order is made out.
7. The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 5.11.2024
A. Tripathi
Justice Vinod Diwakar
