Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:67081 Court No. - 84 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43030 of 2024 Applicant :- Surjeet Alias Surendra Sharma And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kapil Tyagi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard Sri Kapil Tyagi, learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State. 2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated 06.06.2023 submitted by the Investigating Officer against the applicants in Case Crime No.267 of 2021, under sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 324, 307 of IPC, and quash the summoning/cognizance order 21.08.2023 as well as criminal proceeding passed by ACJM, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate- Court No.5, Ghaziabad in Case Crime No.5232 of 2023 "State Vs. Surendra@ Surjeet" arising out of Case Crime No. 267 of 2021, under sections 147, 323, 307, 504, 506 of IPC Police Station Modinagar, District Ghaziabad, 3. Allegation is that applicant No.1 is husband of opposite party no.2. Earlier, opposite party No.2 lodged FIR against the applicants in the year 2013 in regard to matrimonial discord U/s 498-A, 323, 324 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of DP Act, in which charge sheet has been submitted. Opposite party No.2 was living with her parents and in the year 2019, she moved application for maintenance against her husband and despite order of court, applicant No.1 had not paid maintenance. On 21.03.2021, named accused persons came to house of informant threatened, pressurized and assaulted the informant to compromise the matter in regard to maintenance proceedings, when informant refused for the same, then all accused persons assaulted the informant, who received grievous injuries. 4. Counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case due to mala fide intention. All family members have been implicated in the present case. Injuries sustained by injured, are simple in nature. I.O. has submitted final report, thereafter, a protest proceeding has been initiated and I.O. has recorded statement of informant. He further submitted that applicant Nos.2 to 7 are living separately, hence, they have no concern with the alleged incident. No offence under the aforesaid sections is made out. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the submission raised by applicant's counsel and submits that accused persons have been summoned by learned Magistrate after perusing the evidence collected during investigation and found, prima facie, offence against the applicants. Moreover, on perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. The present 482 application of applicants, namely, Surjeet @ Surendra Sharma, Subhash Sharma, Hema, Anil Sharma, Chanchal, Sureshchandra and Kailash Chand Sharma @ Kailash Sharma, are hereby dismissed with the aforesaid observation. 9. However, if the applicants surrender before the concerned court within two weeks from today and apply for bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the court concerned, in accordance with law. 10. For the period of two weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicants before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against them. Order Date :- 30.4.2025 Nitin Verma (Justice Deepak Verma) Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad