Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:33121 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40982 of 2024 Applicant :- Gulsar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for applicant in Court today is taken on record. 2. Heard Snil Kumar Mishra, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State/opposite party no.1. 3. Perused the record. 4. Applicant Gulsar, who is a charge-sheeted accused, has approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the following prayer: "It, is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court may graciously be pleased to quash the entire proceeding of Case No.9112 of 2021 (State Versus Gulsar), in Case Crime No.828 of 2021 Under Section 294, 354A, 452, 376, 386, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Baraut, District-Baghpat, as well as charge sheet dated 26.10.2021 and cognizance/ summoning order dated 28.10.2021 passed by Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baghpat which is pending in the court of F.T.C-1st, Baghpat." 5. At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. for State/opposite party no.1 submits that the applicant was summoned by court below vide summoning order dated 28th October, 2021. As such, a period of more than three years and four months has rolled since the date of passing of summoning order. Offence complained of is triable exclusively by the court of Sessions. As such, the case must have been committed to the court of Sessions. The charges against the applicant must have been framed by the court of Session in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 228 Cr.P.C. Therefore, no interference is required by this Court in this application. 6. When confronted with the above, the learned counsel for applicant fairly submits that charges have already been framed against the applicant by court below. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State/opposite party no.1 and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that since charges have already been framed against applicant by court below in exercise of power under Section 228 Cr.P.C., coupled with the fact that framing of charge order passed by court below has not been impugned in this application, therefore, the prayer made by applicant is present application is now misconceived.Once the charges have been framed by court below the court is bound to answer the same one way or the other. 8. In view of above, no good ground exists to entertain the present application. As a result, this application fails and is liable to be dismissed. 9. This application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Rajeev Misra, J.) Order Date :- 6.3.2025 Sushil/- Digitally signed by :- SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad