Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:8459 Court No. - 17 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1225 of 2025 Applicant :- Suneel Kumar @ Suneel Kumar Yadav @ Sunil Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Roshan Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. Heard. The present case has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. now under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. with the following main reliefs:- "to quash the charge sheet dated 22.09.2022, order dated 03.01.2025 and order dated 23.01.2025 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 17, Sultanpur in Fist Information Report No. 171 of 2020 Case No. 1161 of 2021, Under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 452, 323, 504, 506, 427, 325 IPC PS Dhammaur, District Sultanpur (State of U.P. Vs. Ram Kumar and others) pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 17, Sultanpur and further be pleased to stay the entire proceedings of First Information Report No. 171 of 2020 Case No. 1161 of 2021, Under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 452, 323, 504, 506, 427, 325 IPC PS Dhammaur, District Sultanpur (State of U.P. Vs. Ram Kumar and others) pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 17, Sultanpur." Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant was not involved in the incident as alleged in the FIR. In the FIR, the applicant has been shown as son of one Hausila Yadav whereas the applicant is the son of Shri Chotey Lal. It is further submitted that a dispute between the complainant and Hausila Yadav is going on. From perusal of the F.I.R. , it is found that the dispute was not only between the complainant and the Hausila Prasad but there are four or five persons, whose sons are also involved in the alleged incident. On being asked from the learned counsel for the applicant that as to whether there is any material enclosed alongwith the present application/petition that Hausila Yadav has more than 1 son and the name of the applicant has wrongly been shown, he has shown his inability to show anything on this point. This Court has again asked as to whether there is any material to show that the applicant is not involved in the alleged incident, he replied that the name of the father of the applicant has wrongly been mentioned ignoring completely that earlier also applicant had approached this Court by filing a case bearing Application 482 No. 665 of 2022, which was disposed of by this Court vide its order dated 18.02.2022 giving liberty to the applicant to move an appropriate application before the trial Court and they shall seek a report from the concerned Police. In compliance of the order of Hon'ble High Court , the report was sought in which the name of father has correctly been given and shown him involved in the incident so whether the applicant is involved or not cannot be seen in the present case by this Court as it requires leading/adducing of evidence, which could be seen only by the learned trial Court. In view of the facts, circumstances and the observations mentioned hereinabove, the present case is hereby dismissed. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that a liberty may be given to the applicant to approach the trial Court by moving an application for bail and the Court may be directed to decide the same expeditiously. As prayed, liberty is granted to the applicant. Order Date :- 10.2.2025 Ashish Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench