Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:24572 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 4946 of 2025 Applicant :- Satendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, and perused the entire record. 2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 20.11.2022, cognizance order dated 21.07.2023, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 26645 of 2023, titled State v. Satendra, arising out of Case Crime No. 459 of 2022, under Section 420 IPC and Section 3/5 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, P.S. Sadar Bazar, District Agra, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra. 3. The brief facts of the case are that on 05.09.2022, near Rohta Chauraha, alongside the road a trolley was found parked overloaded with bricks. Due to the absence of a tractor, the weight of the overloaded trolley could not be measured. Furthermore, no registration number or chassis number was found on the trolley. As a result, no proceedings could be initiated under the Motor Vehicles Act. It appears that the said trolley is being used for commercial purposes. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that: (i) the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case based on false and concocted story, (ii) the applicant is not named in the FIR, (iii) the alleged trolley was parked along side the road causing no inconvenience, (iv) merely on the basis of statement of owner of said field, namely, Dr. Samir, the charge sheet has been filed against the applicant, (v) no recovery from the possession of applicant has been made. Learned counsel further submits that from bare reading of the FIR and the material available on record, no offence, under Section 420 IPC and Section 3/5 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 are made out against the applicant. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submits that the name of the applicant is disclosed in the statement of the owner of the field where the alleged overload trolley, with bricks, was found parked. He next submits that the applicant was using the trolley for commercial purposes without a valid registration number and was deriving financial benefits without paying the requisite tax to the government. Therefore, the ingredients of Section 420 of the IPC and Sections 3/5 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, are satisfied. Hence, no case for quashing the proceedings is made out qua the applicant. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, and have gone through the entire record. 7. In State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 SCC(Cr.) 426, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has discussed the scope of inherent powers contained in Section 482 Cr.P.C. and laid down clear guidelines for exercise of such power, and held that where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused besides other parameters for quashing of FIR. 8. In the present case, there is no allegation in the FIR that any inducement for illegal gain of property has been made and neither any mischief has been caused in requirement of Section 420 IPC and Section 3/5 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984. The plain and simple allegation qua applicant is that the applicant has parked unattended overloaded trolley beside the road and was driving the trolley without paying any commercial taxes. There are separate provisions for levy of the taxes in the M.A.C.T Act and other statutes. Therefore, the continuance of criminal proceedings qua applicant would be misuse of the powers of the Court. 9. Thus, in view of the above discussion, this Court has no hesitation in holding that impugned FIR filed by the opposite party no.2 against the applicant is nothing but an abuse of the process of law, therefore this Court finds it to be a fit case for exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Resultantly, the application succeeds and the entire proceedings of charge sheet dated 20.11.2022, cognizance order dated 21.07.2023, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra in Case No. 26645 of 2023, titled State v. Satendra, arising out of Case Crime No. 459 of 2022, under Section 420 IPC and Section 3/5 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, P.S. Sadar Bazar, District Agra, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra, are hereby quashed. 10. Accordingly, the application is allowed. Order Date :- 19.2.2025/A. Tripathi Justice Vinod Diwakar Digitally signed by :- AKHILESH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- AKHILESH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- AKHILESH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- AKHILESH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad