Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:32115 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 7274 of 2025 Applicant :- Tabbabur Rahman And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Yogesh Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused material on record. 2. The instant application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the Revisional Order dated 17.02.2025, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Kasganj in Criminal Revision No. 105 of 2024, titled State v. Tabbabur Rahman & Anr. arising out of Case Crime No.242 of 2024, under Section 3/5/8 of U.P. Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 and Section 3/25 Arms Act, P.S. Amapur, District Kasganj. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits (i) there are no allegations against the applicants that the applicants have been actively involved in the commission of the crime, (ii) as per FIR, the applicants were arrested on spot but the remand of applicants was refused by the trial court, (iii) the applicants are students, (iv) the police have not produced any CCTV footage before the Court, (v) no specific role of slaughtering of cows has surfaced against the applicants, (vi) there is no independent witness to substantiate the allegations satisfying the ingredients of Section Section 3/5/8 of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955, (vii) there is no specific allegations qua applicants for buying and slaughtering the cows and thereafter selling and preserving the beef, (viii) there has been no recovery from the possession of applicant. 4. Per-contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submits that ingredients of Section 3/5A/8 of Cow Slaughter Act and Section 3/25 Arms Act are made out against the applicants. The weapon, used in cow slaughtering, and 40 kg beef has been recovered from the applicants. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and have gone through the statement of the victim, it's prima facie observed that the applicants were arrested on spot and from their possession 40 kg beef and the weapon, used in cow slaughtering, was recovered from the applicants. The ingredients of Section 3/5/8 of U.P. Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 and Section 3/25 Arms Act are satisfied. Therefore, no case for quashing of impugned proceedings is made out. 6. So far as the submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant is concerned, it call for determination on questions of fact which may be adequately adjudicated upon only by the trial court. Adjudication of questions of facts and appreciation of evidence or examining the reliability and credibility of the version does not fall within the arena of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In view of the material on record, it can also not be held that the impugned criminal proceedings are manifestly attended with mala fide and maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. Similarly, no such illegality, perversity or any other substantial error could be pointed out in the impugned summoning order so as to warrant any interference by this court in the exercise of powers u/s 482 Cr.P.C. 7. The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merit, and it is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 5.3.2025 A. Tripathi Justice Vinod Diwakar Digitally signed by :- AKHILESH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad