HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8579 of 2025 Court No. - 14 HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J. 1. Sri Kshitij Singh, Advocate has filed power on behalf of the private respondent, which is taken on record. 2. Heard. 3. This application has been filed with the following prayer:- "To quash the impugned summoning order dated 27.09.2024 passed by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-1st, Ayodhya, in Criminal Case No. 3965/2024 (State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Syed Saqib Ahmed & others); to quash the impugned charge-sheet dated 01.09.2024, and proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3965/2024, arising out of F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No. 56/2024, registered at P.S.- Cantt., District- Ayodhya, under Sections 4 & 10 of the Indian Forest Act, 19271 pending adjudication in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-1st, Ayodhya.same are contained as Annxure No. 1 & 2." 4. On 15.10.2025, following order was passed:- "1. Heard Ms. Saumya Tiwari and Shri Amit Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. 2. This application has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 01.09.2024 as well as summoning order dated 27.09.2024 passed in Criminal Case No. 3965 of 2024 arising out of F.I.R. No. 56 of 2024, under Sections 4 and 10 Indian Forest Act, 1927, P.S. Cantt., District Ayodhya. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Km. Saumya Tiwari, Abhishek Chaubey, Amit Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sayed Saqib Ahamed And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that after considering the entire contents of the case diary, no offence under Sections 4 and 10 of Indian Forest Act is made out. It is also submitted that the charge sheet submitted by the Investigating Officer has been approved by the Supervisory Authority and the same was filed in the court concerned, who also took cognizance without considering the fact that whether offence in the Indian Forest Act is made out or not. It is, thus, submitted that the indulgence of this Court is necessary. 4. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of the applicant and submits that applicant may raise their objection before the court below at the appropriate stage. However, he does not dispute the fact that after reading Sections 4 and 10 of Indian Forest Act, no alleged offence is made out and there may be a possibility for making out an offence under the provisions of U.P. Protection of Trees Act, 1976. 5. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. and gone through the contents of the application, F.I.R. as well as other relevant documents. It is observed by this Court on several times that the investigation is being conducted in most casual manner and Supervisory Officers are also approving the investigation in mechanical manner. In the present case also, after considering the entire material available on record, no offence under the provisions of Forest Act is made out. It is also evident that the F.I.R. was lodged for the offences under Sections 4 and 10 of Indian Forest Act, but in the conclusion part of the charge sheet, Investigating Officer mentioned that charge sheet is being submitted under Sections 4, 10 of the Forest Conservation Act. 6. In view of above, the matter requires consideration. 7. Issue notice to respondent no. 2. 8. List this case on 25.11.2025. 9. Until further orders of this Court, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicant. 10. By the next date of listing, Senior Superintendent of Police, Ayodhya is directed to file his personal affidavit giving parawise reply to the application and also explain about the offence made out in the present case." 5. Learned A.G.A. has filed counter affidavit duly sworn by Dr. Gaurav Grower, Senior Superintendent of Police, Ayodhya, which is taken on record. A482 No. 8579 of 2025 2 6. Learned A.G.A. submits that in relation to the offense in question, investigation was not done properly as the offense in question was to be investigated for the offense related to theft as well as the offenses defined under the provisions of U.P. Protection of Trees Act, 1976. He further submits that in para 12 of the counter affidavit, it is mentioned that preliminary inquiry has been ordered against the erring Investigating Officer. 7. Considering the contents of the aforesaid counter affidavit, it is evident from para nos.9, 10 and 11 of the counter affidavit that the investigation was not done properly. Therefore, the impugned charge-sheet dated 01.09.2024 including its consequential proceedings and the impugned order dated 27.09.2024 are hereby quashed. The trial Court is directed to return the entire police report alongwith the case diary to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ayodhya, forthwith. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Ayodhya is also directed to ensure further investigation within stipulated period and submit police report to the Court concerned in accordance with law. 8. With above directions, the application is allowed. November 25, 2025 Arpan A482 No. 8579 of 2025 3 (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