1 Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:1639 Reserved on:- 20.12.2024 Delivered on:- 09.01.2025 Court No. - 13 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11472 of 2024 Applicant :- Dr. Abdul Mannan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Saima Khan,Anil Kumar Verma,Priya Bharti Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. 1. Heard. 2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking following reliefs:- "To quash the impugned charge-sheet dated 25.03.2009 filed in Case Crime No. 156 of 2009 under Sections 188, 171-H, 290 I.PC., Sections 123, 127, 133, 137 People of Representative Act, and Section 179 of Motor Vehicle Act, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Balrampur (State of U.P. Vs. Dr. Ayyub and others); to quash the cognizance order dated 13.08.2009 arising out of Crl. Case No. 156 of 2009." 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was implicated in the present case on the basis of incorrect facts. The investigation of the case in question was completed within a period of two years and charge-sheet dated 25.03.2009 was submitted under Sections 188, 171-H, 290 I.PC., Sections 123, 127, 133, 137 People of Representative Act, and Section 179 of Motor Vehicle Act. She further submitted that in relation to the offense u/s 188 I.P.C., complaint is to be 2 filed by public servant whose lawful order has not been complied with, and in place of filing complaint, F.I.R. in question was lodged and charge- sheet was submitted by the Investigating Officer. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court passed in the case of C. Muniappan and Ors. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in (2010) 9 SCC 567, and has submitted that entire proceedings may be quashed. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of the applicant and has submitted that the alleged offenses are of the year 2009 and the present application is filed in the year 2024 after about 15 years in the most sketchy manner. He has further submitted that except F.I.R. and charge- sheet, other documents are not annexed with this application. In the present case, admittedly, the charge-sheet dated 25.03.2009 was submitted for the offense u/s 188, 171-H, 290 I.P.C., Section 133, 137, 123, 127 of Representation of People Act and Section 179 of Motor Vehicle Act. It has vehemently been submitted by learned A.G.A. that order- sheet is also not annexed with this application. The matter is related to the year 2009 and the charge-sheet is challenged after about 15 years before this Court. It is well settled by Hon'ble Apex Court that when a criminal incident has taken place and it is found by the police officer that in the said incident, some of the offenses are non cognizable and some are cognizable, then he will conduct an investigation and submit charge-sheet before the competent Court, and trial would be conducted for all the offenses. In the present case, merely on the basis of Section 188 I.P.C., the complaint should not be filed. He has lastly submitted that all these facts can be raised at the appropriate stage, hence, this application is liable to be dismissed. 5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the application as well as other relevant 3 documents, it is evident that this matter is related to the year 2009 and the charge-sheet dated 25.03.2009 is under challenge after about 15 years on the ground that for the offense u/s 188 I.P.C., complaint was to be filed, but Investigating Officer submitted the charge-sheet. Learned counsel for the applicant is also unable to explain the status of the trial as no other document as well as order-sheet is annexed with this application except the charge-sheet and the F.I.R. It is further evident that only complaint is to be filed for the offense u/s 188 I.P.C. It is well settled that once an F.I.R. is lodged for a criminal incident related to cognizable and non cognizable offenses, then it is bounden duty of the Investigating Officer to conduct the investigation and submit a charge-sheet in the reasonable sections and in case any section is found non cognizable, in which, a complaint is to be filed, then there is no need to file complaint and that offense will also be tried by the competent Court. Therefore, the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant are baseless and unfounded and judgement relied by her is also not applicable in the present case. 6. In view of above, this Court is of the view that the present application is misconceived and the same stands dismissed. Order Date :- January 09, 2025 Arpan Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench