Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:20959 Court No. - 19 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3114 of 2025 Applicant :- Aquib Nasim Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Irfan Siddiqui Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Brijesh Singh Vishen Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant praying for quashing the order dated 02.04.2025 passed by the Special Judicial Magistrate, C.B.C.I.D., Lucknow in Case Crime No.548 of 2020, under Sections 409, 420 and 120B I.P.C., P.S. Gomtinagar, District Lucknow whereby he has rejected the objection filed by the applicant against the remand order. 3. Challenging the impugned order, learned counsel for the applicant has contended that once police has filed Charge-Sheet in the case, the Police cannot proceed to further investigate into the matter without the leave of the Court, and further investigation has been started at the behest of the Inspector General of Police. It is contended that the impugned order is per-se illegal as the Court below has failed to correctly appreciate the law on the point. Accordingly, it is contended that impugned order may be set aside and further investigation may be quashed. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon the judgement of Apex Court in the case of Peethambaran Vs. State of Kerala and Another passed in Criminal Appeal No.1381 of 2023. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State would contend that in the instant case, name of applicant is neither in the F.I.R. nor in the Charge-Sheet. It is contended that name of the applicant has surfaced in the General Diary and the further investigation in the matter is necessary as to unearth the scam inasmuch as the scam is of more than Rs.100 crores. It is further contended that it is not the applicant's case that he has been charge sheeted and further investigation has been started. It is further contended that the judgement relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicant in the case of Peethambaran (supra) is not attracted in the instant case. Accordingly, it is submitted that there is no illegality in the impugned order. 5. Be that as it may, it is admitted on record that applicant is neither named in the F.I.R. nor in the charge sheet. The name of the applicant has come into light in the General Diary, and thereafter, the police has started investigation. 6. In the instant case, the police has not yet investigated the matter as far as the applicant is concerned, and stage of filing charge sheet has not come yet. In such view of the fact, the judgement relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicant in the case of Peethambaran (supra) is not applicable for the reason that applicant has neither been charge sheeted nor name of applicant appears in the F.I.R. The applicant would have a case if charge sheet had been filed against him, and thereafter, some further investigation has been started by the police. 7. In such view of the fact, this Court does not find any illegality in the impugned order. 8. Consequently, present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Order Date :- 15.4.2025 Sattyarth Digitally signed by :- SATTYARTH ANAND High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench