HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 11280 of 2024 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 and perused the material available on record. 2. This application has been filed by applicant to quash the -cognizance order dated 11.10.2023 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Kannauj as well as entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 36 of 2019, under sections 323, 504, 506, 354 IPC and section 3(1)(Da) SC/ST Act, Kannauj, P.S. Vishungarh, District Kannauj 3. Submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case just to pressurize and harass the applicant, in fact, no such incident has taken place. Further submission is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the court below has utterly failed to consider as no prima facie case is made out against the applicant. He also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention. 4. From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Sucheta Pathak, Sudeep Kumar Pathak Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Ravi Prakash Srivastava Sumit .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. And Another .....Respondent(s) State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, 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. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228 Cr.P.C. as the case may be, before the court below and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court. 5. The prayer for quashing the entire proceedings of the above mentioned case is hereby refused. 6. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant may be permitted to move discharge application before the court concerned and prayed that till disposal of discharge application, some protection may be provided to the applicant. 7. Having considered the nature of allegations and submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, it is provided that in case the applicant move discharge application, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the court below, in accordance with law, expeditiously. Till the application for discharge is decided, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. 8. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the present application is disposed of finally. September 15, 2025 RPD CRLA No. 11280 of 2024 2 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad