Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:46635 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 9837 of 2025 Applicant :- Anshu Awasthi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA for the State-respondent. 2. This application under section 528 BNSS has been preferred to quash the impugned charge-sheet no. 29A/20 dated 12.12.2023 alongwith cognizance order dated 04.01.2024 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 2296 of 2024 (State of U.P. vs. Anshu Awasthi and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 315 of 2019, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 6/10 of U.P. Public Examination Act, P.S. Kotwali, District-Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar as well as to stay the further proceedings of abovementioned case. 3. Brief facts of the case is that an FIR was lodged by opposite party no. 2 against the applicant and 5 other co-accused persons with allegation that they are indulging in offence under verification proceeding for recruitment of U.P. Police Constable Recruitment Examination, 2018. They have wrongly verified biometric matching on laptop to gain unfair advantage to the candidates who were appeared in the examination at police line Kanpur Nagar where the candidates were appeared for scrutiny physical test, who were declared pass in written examination which was held at District Jhansi. Thereafter, the investigating officer has recorded the statement of the informant as well as the witnesses and submitted a charge sheet on 12.12.2023 and section of Uttar Pradesh Public Examination Act has been imposed by the investigating officer only against the applicant in which the learned concerned court has taken cognizance and summoned the applicant on 04.01.2024. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case while the role and duty of the applicant is only of supervising the employees/operators of the firm. He has not concern with the solvers as well as the candidates. It is further contended that story developed by the informant appears to be false and malicious, therefore the impugned charge-sheet no. 29A/20 dated 12.12.2023 submitted by concerned investigating officer and the summoning/cognizance order dated 04.01.2024 passed by learned concerned court are totally illegal, arbitrary and against the material available on record and as such the above proceedings initiated against the applicant may be quashed. 5. Per contra, learned AGA for the State vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the application and submitted that after conducting detailed inquiry, chargesheet has been submitted by the concerned investigating officer whereupon considering the material on record, learned concerned court taken cognizance and as such, there is no illegality in the order impugned. 6. After having the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties and perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the concerned court after perusal of the charge sheet and other materials which had been submitted along with the same and on the basis thereof had held that there was sufficient material to take cognizance and as such I find no infirmity, specifically with regard to the prayer as made in the application. 7. In view thereof, the application under section 528 BNSS lacks merit and is hereby dismissed. Order Date :- 3.4.2025 #Vik/- Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad