Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:87987 Court No. - 84 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39673 of 2024 Applicant :- Madhav Suri And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Irfan Chaudhary,Srijan Pandey,Virendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sunil Kumar Srivastava Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Sunil Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the impugned charge sheet no. 35A/2024 dated 29.08.2024, cognizance/summoning order dated 21.10.2024 and order dated 6.11.2024 directing to issue Bailable Warrant passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate IIIrd Saharanpur as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 7189 of 2024 CNR No. UPSP040809122024 (State Vs. Madav Suri and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 26 of 2024, under sections 420,467,468, 471,427,120B IPC Police Station Kotwali Nagar District Saharanpur, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate IIIrd Saharanpur. 4. As per the FIR, applicants and opposite party no. 2 are family members and there is allegation in the FIR that on the basis of forged and fabricated documents, applicants have executed sale- deed. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. He next submits that co-accused, namely, Tarun Gupta and Rajan Chopara have challenged the cognizance and summoning order before this Court by filing Application U/S 482 Nos. 41041 of 2024 and 41346 of 2024 and the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 09.12.2024 and 24.02.2025 granted interim order in favour of the co-accused persons. Applicants' case is similar with the co-accused persons. It is a civil nature dispute. On perusal of contents of FIR, no criminal offence under aforesaid sections is made out. Learned Magistrate without applying his judicial mind took cognizance and issued summons against the applicants. He therefore submits, no prosecution could proceed against the applicants, in such circumstances. In support of his submissions learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance over the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court passed in the case of Randheer Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh And Others; (2021) 14 Supreme Court Case 626. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicants and submits that on perusal of contents of FIR, prima facie, offence is made out against the applicants. He next submits that as per the FIR, applicants on the basis of forged and fabricated documents executed sale-deed. Instant 482 Cr.P.C. application is not supported by any material evidence collected during investigation. Cognizance and summoning by learned Magistrate, is just and proper. 6. Considered the submissions raised by learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record. Learned counsel for the informant primarily raised objection that instant 482 Cr.P.C. application is not supported by any evidence collected during investigation by I.O. and when learned counsel for the applicants was asked to file the same he refused to file the same and submits that on perusal of contents of FIR, no offence is made out against the applicants and there is no requirement to file the evidence collected during investigation. Since, instant 482 Cr.P.C. application is not supported by any evidence collected during investigation by I.O. and on perusal of contents of FIR, prima facie, offence is made out against the applicants, therefore, no case for interference by this Court is made out. 7. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 23.5.2025 Aditya Digitally signed by :- ADITYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad