Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:24988 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 41116 of 2024 Applicant :- Anil Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akshat Sinha,Himanshu Pandey,Sanyukta Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Heard Mr. Himanshu Pandey, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1. 2. Perused the record. 3. Applicant-Anil Kumar, who is a prospective 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 be pleased to allow the present application and quash the the order dated 02.04.2024 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi in Case No.- Final Report No. 15 of 2023 (Viddotama Vs Anil Kumar) arising out of Case Crime No. 136 of 2023 under section 376 and 506 of Indian Penal Code, Police Station-Sandipanghat, District- Kaushambi against the applicant. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to stay the further proceedings of Case No.- Final Report No. 15 of 2023 (Viddotama Vs Anil Kumar) arising out of Case Crime No. 136 of 2023 under section 376 and 506 of Indian Penal Code, Police Station-Sandipanghat, District- Kaushambi against the applicant, during the pendency of the present application and/or pass any such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case, otherwise the applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury." 4. At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. submits that since applicant has not yet been summoned by court below, therefore, he has no right to be heard. In support of his submission, he has relied upon the Full Bench judgement of this Court in Father Thomas Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2010 SCC OnLine All 2710. As such, present application at the behest of a prospective accused is not maintainable. 5. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant submits that in view of the law laid down by Apex Court in Abhinandan Jha Vs. Dinesh Mishra, 1967 SCC OnLine SC 107, the impugned order cannot be sustained as the court has no jurisdiction to direct the Investigating Officer to submit the charge sheet. 6. Be that as it may, since the applicant has not yet been summoned by court below, therefore, technically no proceedings are pending against him before court below. As such, the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be exercised by this Court at the instance of such an application. In view of above, the proper remedy available to the applicant is to approach this Court by means of a Criminal Misc. Writ Petition. 7. As a result, present application is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty aforesaid. 8. Certified copies of the documents appended alongwith this application shall be returned to the learned counsel for applicant after obtaining photocopies of the same to be kept on record Order Date :- 20.2.2025 YK Digitally signed by :- YASHWANT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad