Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:28580 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3602 of 2025 Applicant :- Akhilesh Dutt Chaturvedi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mithilesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- Aishwarya Pratap Singh,Arvind Kumar Tripathi,G.A.,Urvashi Kunwar Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. On the request of the learned counsel for the applicant, he is permitted to correct the numbering of the respondents in the affidavit of the present application. 2. Heard Sri Mithilesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Aishwarya Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. 3. The applicant herein has filed the present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. for setting aside the Judgement & order dated 15.1.2025 passed by the Special Judge (E.C Act)/ Additional Session Judge, Court No-04, Agra in Criminal Revision No 913/2024 Akhilesh Dutt Chaturvedi Versus U.P. state and another and order dated 23.10.2024 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra in Case crime No 216/2021 Akhilesh State Vs Chaturvedi Dutt under section 420,408 467, 468,471 I.P.C Police Station Sikandra, District Agra and remand the matter before the trial court for passing fresh order after applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a first information report stood lodged against the applicant on 19.4.2021 being FIR No.0216, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC with an allegation that the opposite party no.2 is the owner of the medical shop and proprietor of nursing and maternity home and the applicant happens to be a one of the accountant and he had misappropriated and done bungling to the tune of Rs.1.25/- crores. He further submits that earlier the applicant had approached this Court while filing the Application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.19599 of 2024, Akhilesh Dutt Chaturvedi vs. State of U.P. and another which came to be disposed of on 30.9.2024 granting liberty to the applicant that to approach court below by filing a discharge application and now the same stands rejected against which a revision has also been rejected. He also submits that the first information report there is no date mentioned in the first information report regarding the dates on which misappropriation was done, secondly, no statement of Bank Manager or the Bank Officials have been taken and the entire fees was being taken by the complainant but in order to conceal the factum of the income from the revenue the said novel practice was being adopted. He next submits the revisional order is not in accordance with law. 5. Learned AGA and Sri Aishwarya Pratap Singh on the other hand submit that what is to be seen in a is the fact that as to whether prima facie offences are made or not. They submit once there happens to be sufficient material then of-course the discharge application cannot be allowed in favour of the accused. He further submits that there happens to be a categorical findings recorded regarding prima facie satisfaction of the Magistrate in that regard. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and I am of the opinion that the offences do make out. So far as the issues which are being sought to be raised by the applicant with regard to non- mentioning of the dates on which misappropriation and non- recording of the statement of the Bank Manager is concerned, these are virtually a defenses and once the trial commences an opportunity would be always available to the applicant to put forward stand and to take all defenses in this regard, accordingly, this Court declines to interfere in the present proceedings. 7. In view of above, the present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. stands consigned to record. Order Date :- 28.2.2025 piyush Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad