Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:11401 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 36001 of 2024 Applicant :- Nitesh Rathaor And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Bind Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Shakti Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent, and perused the record. 2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 25.2.2024, cognizance/summoning order dated 25.9.2024, as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.14414 of 2024 titled State v. Nitesh Rathore and others, arising out of Case Crime No.31 of 2024, under Sections 147, 341, 332, 353, 323, 504, 506, 427, 149, 186, 283 IPC and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Fatehgarh Kotwali, District Farrukhabad, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/Civil Judge (Senior Division)/FTC, Farrukhabad. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that, based on one incident, two FIRs have been erroneously registered by the police, which is impermissible in law. It is contended that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the instant case, and the entire family of the applicants has been dragged into this matter without any basis. It is further submitted that the applicants have also sustained injuries in the alleged incident, which have not been properly considered. 4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. submits that the allegations in both FIRs are distinct and arise from different transactions. It is pointed out that FIR No.0031 of 2024, under Sections 147, 341, 332, 353, 323, 504, 506, 427, 149, 186, and 283 IPC, along with Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, was lodged by Constable Shashikant Pandey regarding an incident involving an assault and the alleged snatching of his service pistol. The complainant has also sustained injuries, for which medical documents are annexed to the record at pages 72-74. In contrast, the second FIR pertains to a road rage incident, which was registered by complainant Utkarsh Dwivedi, alleging that he was assaulted on the road following an altercation. 5. After considering the submissions of both sides and perusing the material on record, it is evident that the allegations in the two FIRs are distinct and arise from separate incidents. The first FIR pertains to the assault on a constable in the discharge of his official duties, while the second FIR pertains to a separate incident of road rage. 6. The contention of the applicants that the entire family has been falsely implicated is a matter of defense, which cannot be adjudicated in a proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The applicants have an adequate opportunity to raise all such defenses during the trial. 7. In view of the aforesaid, this Court finds no reason to interfere in the proceedings under its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The application is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 21.1.2025 Anil K. Sharma Justice Vinod Diwakar Digitally signed by :- ANIL KUMAR SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad