Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:67816 Court No. - 84 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43034 of 2024 Applicant :- Rajendra Prasad Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Nikhil Saxena,Rajeev Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State. 2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet no.301/2022 dated 26.09.2022, cognizance order dated 22.03.2023 as well as to quash the entire proceedings of Case No.1280 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No.0286 of 2021 (State vs.Rani Devi), under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Fatehgarh Kotwali District Farrukhabad, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Farrukhabad. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Allegation alleged in the FIR is false and baseless, not supported by any evidence. Applicant got the sale deed in his favour in the year 1977. Thereafter, he sold the property to some other person. The informant-complainant has not filed any suit in regard to cancellation of sale deed which was executed in favour of the applicant in the year 1977. Statement of the witnesses are not supporting the prosecution case. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the submission raised by applicant's counsel and submits that submission raised by learned counsel for the applicant is disputed question of facts, which cannot be decided at this stage. Applicant has placed reliance over external evidence which are not part of the case diary. 5. 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. 6. 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 and another, 2023 Live Law (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. 7. Considered the arguments raised by both the parties. Prima-facie offence is made out against the applicant. Submission raised by learned counsel for the applicant is disputed question of facts which cannot be taken into consideration at this stage. No interference is warranted. The present 482 application of applicant- Rajendra Prasad Gupta is hereby dismissed with the aforesaid observation. Order Date :- 30.4.2025 SKD Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad