Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:114370 Court No. - 72 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 33525 of 2024 Applicant :- Mukesh Singh Alias Mukesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Shankar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State. 2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the impugned charge-sheet No.159/2024 dated 29.04.2024, cognizance order dated 22.08.2024 as well as entire proceeding of Case No.3039 of 2024 (State vs. Mukesh) arising out of Case Crime No.24 of 2024 (State vs. Mukesh), under sections 279, 304A, 427 I.P.C., Police Station Nigohi, District Shahjahanpur, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Court no.17, Shahjahanpur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He next submitted that the applicant is not owner of the vehicle nor he has any concern with the vehicle involved in the accident. Learned counsel for the applicant next submitted that owner of the vehicle is one Sanjay Kumar. Vehicle has been released in favour of the owner Sanjay Kumar. Learned counsel for the applicant next submits that cognizance and summoning by learned magistrate is not supported by any evidence. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the submission raised by applicant's counsel and submitted that submission raised by learned counsel for the applicant is disputed question on facts which cannot be adjudicated at this stage. Investigating Officer has collected sufficient evidence against the applicant. Applicant was driving the vehicle. 5. 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 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. 6. 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. 7. Considered the arguments raised by both the parties. Investigating officer has collected cogent evidence against the applicant. No interference is warranted. The present 482 application of applicant- Mukesh Singh @ Mukesh, is hereby dismissed with the aforesaid observation. Order Date :- 16.7.2025 SKD Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad