Sushil Kumar Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko. and Another

This application has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 16.9.2023 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.15690 of 2024 "State vs. Sushil Kumar Shukla and another" arising out of FIR No.0211 of 2023 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 34, 120B IPC, Police Station Sarojini Nagar, District Lucknow South.

¶12

Counsel for applicant has submitted that a bare perusal of FIR does not indicate any offence and the charge sheet has been filed against the applicant without there being any offence committed by him. It has been submitted that enquiry was initiated by the District Magistrate Lucknow wherein it is mentioned that the applicant was instrumental in giving benefit to one Vishal Tiwari by manipulating navin parti record in his name. It is further pointed out in the enquiry report that Vishal Tiwari has executed a gift deed in favour of applicant's son of Gata no.444 measuring 0.266 hectare, Village Amausi, Pargana Bijnor, Tehsil Sarojninagar, Lucknow. But it is the case of the applicant that he was not posted in Sarojninagar when entry was made in fasli year 1414-19. The name of Vishal Tiwari was mutated in 2000 and at that time applicant was not posted in Sarojninagar Tehsil. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant was transferred on 26.7.2012 to Sarojninagar Tehsil and remained there till 2019 and thereafter, he was transferred to another place and the name of Vishal Tiwari was already recorded in khatauni

¶13

A482 No. 4098 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

which is evident from khatauni of fasli year 1414-19.

¶16

On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted on the basis of Annexure CA-1 which is part of charge sheet that departmental proceedings were initiated and Sri Sandeep Kumar Gupta, Additional District Magistrate had given report on 19.5.2023 in which it is mentioned that on the date of relieving he passed the order on RC Form-9 mentioning therein that Vishal Tiwari was dead and name of his wife Radha was recorded on the basis of legal heir and he also sent report on the same date to Revenue Inspector, Khushalganj and on the same date Revenue Inspector passed the order and name of Radha was mutated. It has been further pointed out by learned AGA that name of Vishal Tiwari was expunged on the basis that he was dead and a gift deed has been done on 27.1.2021 at Registration no.1, Jild no.5880 page 75-88, Serial no.3123, Sub Registrar, Sarojninagar, Lucknow. Paritosh Shukla son of Sushil Kumar Shukla is the son of the applicant in whose name, gift deed has been made. Forgery has been committed by the applicant who was posted as Lekhpal at the relevant time. It has been submitted that the applicant being Lekhpal was involved in doing forgery and was also involved to benefit his own son. It has been submitted that the I.O. has collected evidence on record and after going through the entire charge sheet it cannot be said that offence is not made out and this Court cannot do mini trial and evidence cannot be weighed here.

¶17

I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶18

After going through the record and considering the submissions on behalf of parties and Annexure-CA-1 as well as the submissions made in the counter affidavit filed by the State, I find that it cannot be said that offence is not made out. The allegation of forgery and misuse of post has been mentioned in the evidence collected by I.O. and this Court cannot adduce the evidence for which certainly trial is required.

¶19

It is settled law that the court while exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot do mini trial and unless evidence are adduced, witnesses are produced, the Court cannot give any finding. The allegation of forgery is levelled against the applicant, who was posted as Lekhpal and also the

¶20

A482 No. 4098 of 2025

¶21

3

¶22

allegation is levelled to the extent that he had benefited his own son by doing manipulation and giving report in RC Form-9 to the Revenue Inspector on the date when he was relieved from his place. The allegation is serious therefore, I do not find any ground to interfere.

¶23

The application stands dismissed.

¶24

(Brij Raj Singh,J.)

¶25

November 4, 2025

¶26

Sachin

¶27

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MEHROTRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sushil Kumar Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushil Kumar Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mohammad Akbar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Subhash Singh and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Alka Singh @ Neha Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Divya Pandey @ Gudiya @ Divya Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Abhishek Pratap Singh ( Ajeet Singh in Fir ) Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Mohammad Hussain vs M/S, Arafat Developers Private Ltd., Thru. Its Dir. Furqan Ahmad