HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8437 of 2025 Court No. - 14 HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J. 1. Heard Sri Rishabh Kapoor, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This application has been filed with the following prayer:- "To quash the charge-sheet dated 15.05.2009 and summoning order dated 16.02.2010 as well as entire consequential proceedings in Case Crime No. 170 of 2009." 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case as there was a civil dispute between the parties. He further submits that only with the intention to make pressure, the impugned F.I.R. was lodged on the basis of concocted facts. Thereafter, the charge-sheet was submitted. He next submits that the pendency of the trial comes into the notice of the applicant in the year 2023 and he received non bailable warrant, after that, he applied for bail and was granted bail. He lastly requests for indulgence of this Court. 4. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of the applicant and submits that no even a single statement recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. is annexed with the petition. He further submits that the alleged offense is of the year 2009 and the charge-sheet was prepared on 15.05.2009 and cognizance was taken by the competent Court on 16.02.2010. He also submits that at such a belated stage, no interference is required, hence, the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rishabh Kapoor, Krishna Kumar Vishwakarma, Piyush Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Raj Kapoor .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) petition is liable to be dismissed. 5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the impugned F.I.R. was lodged on 18.04.2009, thereafter, the charge-sheet was prepared on 15.05.2009 and the cognizance was taken by the competent Court on 16.02.2010 for the offense u/s 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. The evidence collected by the Investigating Officer cannot be considered at this stage as it is well settled by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of C.B.I. vs. Aryan Singh reported in (2023) SCC OnLine SC 379. Therefore, the instant application, being misconceived, is dismissed. 6. However, it is open to the applicant to file discharge application at the appropriate stage and in case any such application is filed, same shall be considered and decided by a reasoned and speaking order. 7. The trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously without giving any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties as the alleged offense is of the year 2009. 8. Commissioner of Police, Lucknow and Joint Director, Prosecution, Lucknow shall ensure the presence of the witnesses and accused persons before the trial Court. 9. Office is also directed to communicate this order to the trial Court, forthwith. October 9, 2025 Arpan A482 No. 8437 of 2025 2 (Rajeev Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench