Ajeet Vikram Singh and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:64793

Court No. - 84

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35472 of 2024

Applicant :- Ajeet Vikram Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mahendra Pal Singh Gaur,R.U. Rinki Renu Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated 17.11.2023 and to quash the entire proceedings of Case No.2931 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No.0383 of 20203 (State vs.Ajeet Vikram Singh), under sections 323, 427 I.P.C., Police Station Allahganj, District Shahjahanpur, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Meerut.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. FIR was registered under sections 427, & 323 I.P.C. Name accused persons assaulted the informant as a result thereof informant received received injuries. All allegation alleged in the FIR primafacie discloses no offence against the applicants and Investigating Officer has submitted charge-sheet. Summoning of learned magistrate is without application of judicial mind. It is case of previous enmity. Applicants are old person having no concern with alleged incident.

¶9

Per contra , learned A.G.A. opposed the submission raised by applicants' counsel and submits that from perusal of FIR, primafacie offence is made out against the applicants and submission raised by learned counsel for the applicants is disputed question of facts and cannot be decided at this stage. Trial court has rightly summoned the applicants.

¶10

The grounds taken in the application reveal that many of them relate to disputed question of fact. 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

¶11

Apex Court in catena of judgments that The impugned criminal proceeding against the applicants is abuse of the process of the Court and is liable to be quashed by this Court.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 cases, where it manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the institution or continuance of the criminal proceedings or where allegations made in First Information Report or charge-sheet and the materials relied in support of same, on taking their face value and accepting in their entirety do not disclose the commission of any offence against the accused. The disputed questions of facts and defence of the accused cannot be taken into consideration at this pre-trial stage.

¶12

In view of the above, in the light of judgment of the Apex Court in the matters of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, Manik B. Vs. Kadapala Sreyes Reddy and another, 2023 Live Law (SC) 642, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, 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, no ground for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case, is made out which may call for any interference by this Court in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the same do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity.

¶13

Considered the arguments raised by both the parties. From the record, it is apparent that injured has received injury and learned magistrate has issued summons against the applicants. Prima-facie offence is made out against the applicants. No interference is warranted. The present 482 application of applicants- Ajeet Vikram Singh & Virendrfa Pal Singh, is hereby dismissed with the aforesaid observation

¶14

Order Date :- 28.4.2025 SKD

¶15

Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ajeet Vikram Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajeet Vikram Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajeev Kumar Proprietor Dadda Ji Gold Company and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Zamir Ahmad vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Amarnath Alias Vishram Kushwaha and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Mansoor Ahamad vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravi Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Gore Yadav and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another