Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:117708 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ***** (SL No.11) Court No. - 78 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42702 of 2024 Applicant :- Faizam Husain Khan And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mamta,Santosh Kumar Pandey,Saurabh Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J. 1. Heard Sri Saurabh Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants and Surendra Tiwari, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the summoning order dated 03.08.2018 passed in Complaint No. 1429 of 2016 (New No. 169/23), Surendra Kumar vs. Jagdish Prasad and Others under Sections 420, 467, 471, 504, 506 I.P.C. as well as the Revisional Order dated 29.03.2024 passed in Criminal Revision No. 65 of 2023, P.S.- Sadar Bazar, District- Shahjahanpur, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that he is a bona fide purchaser of the property, and with regard to the same there is a civil dispute between the parties, which is being given criminal color by filing the instant case by the opposite party no.2. Therefore, seeks quashing of the entire proceedings. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. submits that against the summoning order dated 03.08.2018, the applicants had filed a criminal revision petition, which has also been dismissed. It is further stated by learned A.G.A. that the instant case is a disputed question of facts, which cannot be determined by this Court, while exercising the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In view thereof, no interference is called for in the instant matter. 5. Having heard the rival submissions made by learned counsels for the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the record of the case. From the record of the case, it is apparent that the opposite party no.2 has filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., alleging therein various facts of the case, which are disputed by the applicants herein with regard to the execution of the Mukhtarnama and execution of the sale deed in favor of the opposite party no.2 as well as the applicants herein. The trial court has informed a prima facie case against the applicants, on the basis of the material available on record and summoned the applicants herein for the offenses under 420, 467, 471, 504, 506 I.P.C., vide order dated 03.08.2018, against which a Criminal Revision No. 65 of 2023 was filed by the applicants herein, after five years of the summoning order passed by the learned Magistrate. The same has also been dismissed vide order dated 29.03.2024, against which the instant application has been filed by the applicants herein. 6. In the considered opinion of this Court, that the allegations levelled against the applicants disclose a prima facie case against the applicants and further that the instant case involves a disputed question of facts which cannot be determined while exercising the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In view thereof, this Court does not find it appropriate to interfere in the instant matter, and accordingly, the instant application is dismissed. Order Date :- 21.7.2025 Shubham Arya (Anish Kumar Gupta, J.) Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM ARYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad