Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:67203 Court No. - 84 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43103 of 2024 Applicant :- Nandlal And 16 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pandey Balkrishna,Saumyank Anand Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard 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 no.28A/2024 dated 26.04.2024, cognizance order dated 24.07.2024 as well as to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.45494 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No.22 of 2024 (State vs.Nandlal & others), under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 427, 336, 308 I.P.C., Police Station Unj, District Bhadohi, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Bhadohi. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is alleged in the FIR that named accused persons and 10 to 12 unknown persons reached on the disputed plots where construction was going on and started abusing the opposite party no.2 and they assaulted the opposite party no.2 and his wife. As a result thereof they received injuries. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that allegation alleged in the FIR is malice prosecution and has lodged FIR after filing of civil injunction suit against the opposite party no.2. Learned counsel for the applicants argued that the injures received by the injured is simple in nature and cannot be said that 16 to 17 persons assaulted the injured persons. Learned counsel for the applicants next submitted that x-ray report is not supported the prosecution story and there is no fracture. He next submitted that various persons have been implicated in the present case, who resides outside the village/city. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the submission raised by applicants' counsel and submits that from the statements of the injured, informant and independent witnesses, it is apparent that applicants reached at the spot and assaulted the injured and, moreover, the factual disputes cannot be considered/decided at this stage. 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. From the record, it is apparent that named accused persons reached at the disputed plot, thereafter they assaulted the injured, as a result, injured have received injuries which is evident from the injury report. Prima-facie offence is made out against the applicants. Submission raised by learned counsel for the applicants is disputed question of facts which cannot be taken into consideration at this stage. No interference is warranted. The present 482 application of applicants- Nandlal, Vijay, Bhunvar, Ramlolarakh, Ramanath, Shani, Vanshidhar, Amit, Vikas @ Ankit, Dinesy, Nirmala, Sanju Kumari @ Priti Varma, Gayatri Devi, Sheela Devi,Sushila Devi, Amitabh Vidyarthi & Mangaru Ram 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