Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:74922 Court No. - 84 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 36438 of 2024 Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Mishra And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Satish Kumar,Subhash Chandra Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Prakash Tripathi Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard Sri Subhash Chandra Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Prakash Tripathi, 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 including the charge sheet dated 09.11.2023 and the learned court below has taken cognizance/summoning order dated 16.08.2024 in case no.1282 of 2024 (State Versus Shailenra Kumar Mishra and others) registered with case crime no. 730 of 2022, under sections 323, 504, 506, 427, 308 I.P.C., Police Station Handia, District Allahabad, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no.8, Allahabad. 3. Counsel for the applicants submits that allegation against the applicants is that applicants assaulted the informant and injured. Applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case due to mala fide intention. Injuries received by injured are simple in nature and no fracture sustained by the injured. Prosecution story is not supported by statement of doctor. Allegation alleged in FIR is false and baseless. I.O. has not collected any evidence to prosecute the applicants in present case. 4. Per contra, informant's counsel has vehemently opposed the submission raised by applicants' counsel and submits that injuries sustained by injured are severe in nature as injured has received lacerated wounds. C.T. scan of the injured, has been done, but the same not been filed in present application. It is not a case of false implication. He next submitted that arguments raised by learned counsel for the applicants are factual aspects of the matter, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 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. The present 482 application of applicants, namely, Shailendra Kumar Mishra, Aman Mishra and Sachin Mishra, is hereby dismissed with the aforesaid observation. 8. After dismissal of the case, applicants' counsel prays that bail direction may be given to court below to the applicants, the request made by applicant's counsel before this Court, is hereby rejected. Order Date :- 8.5.2025 Nitin Verma (Justice Deepak Verma) Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad