Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:55788 Court No. - 84 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 41445 of 2024 Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of Uttar Pradesh Through Its Secretary Department Of Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Aravind Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pradeep Kumar Yadav,Sameer Yadav Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant, and learned AGA for the State. 3. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceedings arising out of charge sheet dated 13.05.2024 registered as charge-sheet no. 111 of 2024 in case crime no. 428/2023, under Sections 354, 506, 427and 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Police Station- Kotwali, Bareilly, U.P. (marked as Annexure No. 1). 4. It is alleged in the first information report that informant, who is an advocate was doing parvi of his personal case then, applicant has assaulted him. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Applicant is having no concern with the alleged incident. Allegation alleged in the first information report is not supported by any independent witness. Informant is an Advocate and he is pressurizing the applicant to compromise the matter. Story narrated in the FIR is false & baseless and same has been captured in C.C.T.V. camera. Summoning by learned Magistrate is without application of his judicial mind. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the submission raised by applicant's counsel and submits that earlier applicant challenged the first information report before this Court by filing Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 11474 of 2024 and Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 01.08.2024 dismissed the same. Now, I.O. has submitted charge- sheet against the applicant after collecting material evidence. Summoning by learned Magistrate is just and proper, hence, applicant is not entitled for relief as prayed. 6. Learned A.G.A. has also opposed the submissions raised by applicant's counsel and submits that that submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant are factual aspects of the matter, which cannot be considered at this stage. 7. The grounds taken in the application reveal that many of them relate to disputed question 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. 8. 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. 9. The present 482 application of applicant- Rajeev Kumar, is hereby dismissed with the aforesaid observation. Order Date :- 16.4.2025 Aditya Digitally signed by :- ADITYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad