Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:107194 Court No. - 72 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 37291 of 2024 Applicant :- Prachi @ Roli And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Sharma,Sushil Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State. 2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceeding of Case No. 3925 of 2024 (State vs. Prachi @ Roli and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 468 of 2023, under Sections 420, 120-B, 384, 389 I.P.C., Police Station- Kalyanpur, District- Kanpur Nagar, pending before court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate IInd, Kanpur Nagar as well as impugned Charge sheet dated 19.05.2024 and cognizance order dated 03.09.2024 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate IInd, Kanpur Nagar. 3. It is alleged in the first information report that applicant no. 1 developed friendship on Facebook, thereafter, she started blackmailing the son of the informant. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. Instant first information report has been lodged with malicious intention as earlier applicant no. 1 has lodged first information report against the opposite party no. 2, his son and two other persons registered as Case Crime No. 73 of 2023 on 21.02.2023. Instant first information report has been lodged after a delay of about 10 months through an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. in counterblast of the first information report lodged by the applicant no. 1. All allegations alleged in the present first information report are false, baseless and without support of any evidence. There is no cogent evidence to prosecute the applicants in the present case. I.O. has not collected any credible evidence in regard to blackmailing of informant's son. Cognizance/Summoning order passed by the learned Magistrate is without application of judicial mind and the same is liable to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the submissions raised by applicants' counsel and submits that allegations alleged in the first information report are, prima facie, supported by the evidence collected by the I.O. Moreover, instant first information report has been filed immediately after the alleged incident, which is apparent from perusal of the order-sheet. Applicant no. 1 is a married lady and other accused persons are involved in blackmailing the informant's son. Others submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicants are disputed questions of fact, which cannot be considered and examined at this stage by this Court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 5. Considered the submissions raised by learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record. From perusal of record, it appears that this is a case of honey-trap and blackmailing the persons to become friends on Facebook and Instagram. Applicant no. 1, who is a married lady, entangle the informant's son in her love story and thereafter, trying to blackmail him. The grounds taken in the application reveal that many of them relate to disputed questions 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 & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (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 application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. 8. However, if the applicants surrender before the concerned court within three weeks from today and apply for bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the court concerned, in accordance with law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922. 9. For the period of three weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicants before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against them. Order Date :- 8.7.2025 Aditya Digitally signed by :- ADITYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad