Ramnaresh Singh vs State Of U.P. And Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 315 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Ramnaresh Singh vs State Of U.P. And Another on 1 May, 2025

Author: Deepak Verma

Bench: Deepak Verma

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:68779
 
Court No. - 84
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 37863 of 2024
 

 
Applicant :- Ramnaresh Singh
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Ishwar Chandra Tyagi
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
 

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State.

2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 17686 of 2024 (State Vs. Shailendra Singh @ Raju Yadav & others), arising out of Case Crime No. 7 of 2021, Under Section 406, 419, 420, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Fatehpur, including charge sheet dated 20.05.2023 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 16.08.2024 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehpur.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Allegation alleged in the FIR is false and baseless. I.O. has not collected any cogent evidence against the applicant to prosecute him in the present case. Applicant has been roped in the present case due to mala fide intention. Cognizance/Summoning order passed by learned Magistrate, is without application of his judicial mind and the same is liable to be quashed.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the submission raised by applicant's counsel and submitted that prima facie offence is made out against the applicant. Further, submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant are disputed questions of fact, which cannot be considered or examined by this Court at this stage in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

5. After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the entire record, this Court is of the view that it is well settled that the appreciation of evidence is a function of the trial court. This Court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot assume such jurisdiction and put an end to the process of trial provided under the law. It is also settled by the Apex Court in catena of judgments that the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at pre-trial stage should not be used in a routine manner but it has to be used sparingly, only in such an appropriate case, where on the face of record, the criminal proceeding is clear abuse of the process of the Court. The disputed questions of facts and defence of the accused cannot be taken into consideration at this pre-trial stage.

6. It is also well settled that at the stage of summoning the accused, the court below is not required to go into the merit and demerit of the case. Genuineness or otherwise of the allegation cannot be even determined at the stage of summoning the accused. There is no good ground to invoke inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by this Court at this stage. The relief as claimed by the applicant through this application is refused.

7. The defence version of the applicant has to be considered by the court concerned at the appropriate stage. The accused/applicant has statutory remedy of moving discharge application before the court concerned at the appropriate stage.

8. Considering the material on record, it is directed that, if objection/discharge application is filed on behalf of the applicant before the court concerned within two weeks, it is expected that the court concerned will consider and decide the same expeditiously within a period of two months in accordance with law.

9. With the aforesaid observations/directions, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 1.5.2025

Aditya