Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:11355 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 36025 of 2024 Applicant :- Vikas Malik Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Tripathi,Mohd. Asim Zulfiquar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent, and perused the record. 2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to seek the quashing of the charge-sheet dated 19.04.2023, issued under Sections 420, 406, and 120B IPC, as well as Sections 3, 4, 5, and 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978. The charge-sheet arises from Case Crime No. 224 of 2021, registered at Police Station Kandhala, District Shamli. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant argues that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is contended that the FIR does not assign any specific role to the applicant, nor has any incriminating evidence been unearthed during the investigation. The applicant is neither a director nor an employee of the company Brujmart (OPC) Pvt. Ltd., where the complainant allegedly invested Rs.6,20,000/-. To support these arguments, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., Criminal Appeal No. 3114 of 2024, which holds that Sections 420 and 406 IPC cannot be read together. 4. In response, learned A.G.A. submits that the applicant persistently lured the complainant and induced him to invest in the company. The allegations against the applicant are serious, as the investigation reveals that the applicant actively persuaded the complainant to deposit money. Moreover, the applicant's role falls squarely within the scope of Sections 3, 4, 5, and 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978. It is further argued that the applicant has not produced the complete case diary to substantiate his arguments, and the charge-sheet clearly discloses a prima facie case against him. 5. After considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for both parties and examining the record, it is evident that the allegations in the FIR and the charge-sheet, coupled with the evidence collected during the investigation, prima facie establish the commission of cognizable offenses. The applicant's contentions regarding his role and involvement in the alleged offenses raise factual issues that cannot be decided at this stage, which can be examined during the trial. 6. The reliance placed by the applicant on the judgment in Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. (supra) is misplaced in the present factual context, as the issues raised pertain to evidentiary matters and legal interpretations that can be addressed at the stage of framing of charges or during the trial. 7. In view of the foregoing discussions, this Court finds no ground to interfere under its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The application lacks 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