Allahabad High Court
Vipin Kumar Pandey vs State Of U.P. And Another on 28 April, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:64778
Court No. - 87
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25930 of 2024
Applicant :- Vipin Kumar Pandey
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.
1. Heard Sri S.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.D. Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State-O.P. no.1 and perused the record.
2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant praying for quashing order dated 27.03.2024 passed by Sessions Judge, Kushinagar at Padrauna in Criminal Revision No.27 of 2024 (Vipin Kumar Pandey vs. State of U.P. and another) and summoning order dated 21.10.2022 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar at Padrauna in Complaint Case no.3927 of 2020 (Chhote Lal Singh vs. Vipin Kumar Pandey) u/s 406 IPC, P.S. Jataha Bazar, District-Kushinagar as well as entire proceedings of the aforesaid case.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that O.P. no.2 filed an application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the applicant with an allegation that he has transferred an amount of ?6,50,000/- in the account of the applicant, which he had taken from few people for sending them abroad but the applicant after taking the said amount has given them forged documents and also called them for training in Mumbai. The further allegation in the application is that even though the persons reached Mumbai but no training was given. He further submitted that applicant has enclosed his bank statement to prove that no transfer of money was ever made as is alleged by O.P. no.2. He submitted that the court below failed to consider the evidence available on record in its right perspective and issued summoning order on 21.10.2022, against which the applicant preferred Criminal Revision No.27 of 2024, which was dismissed vide order dated 27.03.2024. He submitted that by means of instant application the applicant has challenged both the aforesaid orders. He further submitted that the applicant has never committed any offence as alleged against him. He also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the application and contended that the impugned orders does not suffer from any illegality, infirmity or impropriety. He further submitted that the veracity of the facts cannot be adjudicated by this Court in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and the same can only be gone through during trial before the court below. It is further submitted that the Court below has rightly summoned the applicant and the revisional court has also passed a reasoned order and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned orders as well as the on going proceedings.
5. From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court.
6. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 has laid down the guidelines under which circumstances the Court should, in its inherent power, entertain an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The guidelines are as follows:-
"(i) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.
(ii) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.
(iii) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.
(iv) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.
(v) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.
(vi) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the Act concerned (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the Act concerned, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
(vii) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fides and/or where the proceeding is 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."
7. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918, R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192, and lastly, Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 has held that only those cases in which no prima facie case is made out can be considered in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
8. The instant application does not fall under the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgments mentioned above, and followed in a number of matters. Moreover, the facts as alleged cannot be said that, prima facie, no offence is made out against the applicant. It is only after the evidence and trial, it can be seen as to whether the offence, as alleged, has been committed or not.
9. Hence, the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be entertained and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.4.2025
Manish Himwan
