HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9625 of 2025 Court No. - 14 HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J. 1. Heard 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 impugned order dated 20.9.2025 passed by Special Judge N.I.A. / Additional Session Judge, Court No.3, District- Lucknow in S.T. No. 1539/2023, State of U.P. Versus Shiv Kumar Sahu, arising out of Case Crime No. 349/2022, u/s 5/6 Explosive Substances Act, P.S.- Mankapur, District- Gonda." 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case at the time of filing of the charge- sheet. He further submits that the applicant was not named in the F.I.R. and first charge-sheet was submitted against the main accused, namely, Rizwan Ali, Kismat Ali and Salman. He further submits that the investigation was conducted and the charge-sheet was submitted against the applicant also without any evidence, thereafter, discharge application was filed, which was rejected by learned trial Court in the most mechanical manner, hence, indulgence of this Court is required. 4. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of the applicant and submits that vague application for discharge was filed before learned trial Court and the defense of the applicant cannot be considered at the time of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ramendra Kumar, Kamal Swaroop Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shiv Kumar Sahu .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru Principal Secretary Home And Another .....Opposite Party(s) discharge, hence, there is no illegality in the impugned order. 5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that not even a single evidence collected by the Investigating Officer is annexed with the application and general pleading is mentioned in the discharge application. Therefore, there is no illegality in the order passed by the trial Court. 6. With above observations, the application, being misconceived, is dismissed. 7. The trial Court is directed to conclude the trial in question, expeditiously. December 2, 2025 Arpan A482 No. 9625 of 2025 2 (Rajeev Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench