Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:22324 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3776 of 2025 Applicant :- Sachin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Chitranshu Srivastav,Tabish Yusufi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Chitranshu Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA. 2. This is an application under Section 482 has been preferred for quashing of the order dated 04.08.2022 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Agra as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 9320 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 0069 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, IPC (State of U.P. Vs. Sachin), P.S. Chhatta, District- Agra. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case particularly when the FIR alleges commission of offence under Sections, 420, 467, 468 IPC relatable to the commission of offences on 23.05.2022 with regard to carrying the caps of portable alcohol and recovery of the same being 1960. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is no eye witness to the said incident and the FIR has been lodged and only on account of some hot talks. The entire case is being planted and though the trial is going on but the witness which are to be produced by the prosecution are not coming forwards and dates by dates are being given. 4. Learned AGA, on the other hand, submits that the entire issue sought to be raised upon by the learned counsel for the applicant centered around factual issues which cannot be gone into the present proceedings. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the record, this Court is of the opinion that factual issues cannot be gone into the proceedings under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. particularly, when the trial has not commenced, in the background of the dictum in the case of Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and others, AIR 2021 SC 1918. 6. In view of the same, this Court declines to interfere in the present proceedings. 7. The application is accordingly, dismissed. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant submits that a direction be issued for consideration of the bail. 8. This Court has no reason to disbelieve that in case, applicant moves appropriate proceedings before the court below for enlargement of bail, then the same may be decided with most expedition in accordance with law of the land. Order Date :- 17.2.2025 Rajesh Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad