Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:113201 Court No. - 79 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16723 of 2006 Applicant :- Arun Kumar Kaushik Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anoop Trivedi,Swetashwa Agarwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri Swetashwa Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State- opposite party no. 1 and perused the record. 2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the request to quash the proceedings of Case No. 1751 of 2004, under sections 409, 217 and 201 I.P.C. relating to P.S. Medical College, Meerut pending in the court of Special Chief Judicial Magistrate Meerut. 3. As per allegations levelled in the F.I.R. which was lodged by the Inspector CBCID (CIS) on 06.01.1990, the applicant while being posted as S.H.O. of P.S. Medical College, Meerut, had not acted upon the request of S.D.M, City, Meerut for lodging of the F.I.R. against some persons who had deposited forged & fabricated admission/entrance form. The same is under challenge by means of the instant application. 4. Record further reveals that Investigating Officer after conducting investigation submitted final report on 24.08.1994 before the court concerned. Upon which, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, issued show cause notice to the applicant on 18.10.1994 and thereafter vide order dated 08.11.1994 rejected the final report submitted by the Investigating Officer and summoned the applicant and when he did not appear, learned Magistrate issued non- bailable warrant against the applicant. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that order passed by the learned Magistrate is totally unreasonable as he has reiterated the fact that the final report has been submitted in the matter and on the basis of record offence against the applicant is made out. He further submits that reason is mandatory before issuing summoning order. To buttress his argument he placed reliance on the judgement passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Gangadhar Janardan Mhatre vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in MANU/SC/0830/2004. 6. He further submits that even assuming the facts as stated in the F.I.R. is correct and summoning order has been rightly issued, the proceedings cannot be initiated as it is barred by section 197 Cr.P.C. The applicant herein was in government service, therefore no criminal proceeding can be initiated against the Government Officer. To support his argument he placed reliance on the Judgement passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Indra Devi vs. The State of Rajasthan, reported in MANU/SC/0472/2021. 7. He further submits that the F.I.R was lodged after 7 years and there is no reason has been given for delay. Moreover, applicant has been summoned under sections 409, 217 and 201 I.P.C. and prima facie no offence under section 409 I.P.C. is made out against the applicant, therefore, order passed by the Magistrate in the aforementioned complaint case is liable to be quashed. 8. Per contra, learned AGA submits the applicant was no longer in service and there is no requirement to take any sanction. He futher submits that the applicant has been summoned on the basis of case diary and other documents which is incriminating in nature. He further submits that the applicant was involved in destroying the evidence and document. The order passed by the trial court is just and proper, there is no illegality, as the same has been passed after considering the evidence brought on record, therefore, no interference is required by this Court in the instant matter. 9. Heard the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and perused the record. 10. From perusal of record it is apparent that the applicant was posted as S.H.O. of Police Station Medical College, Meerut at that time and when S.D.M. City, Meerut requested for lodging of F.I.R., the same has not been lodged by him and when no action was taken by him, the official brought this fact to the notice of CBCID and as result F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant. Thereafter, Investigating Officer conducting investigation and submitted final report before the court concerned. Upon which, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, issued show cause notice to the applicant on 18.10.1994 and thereafter vide order dated 08.11.1994 rejected the final report submitted by the Investigating Officer and issued summoning order against the applicant and when applicant did not appear, learned Magistrate issued non-bailable warrant against the applicant. So far as the delay in lodging the F.I.R. is concerned, delay is possible because after getting the request for lodging the F.I.R. from S.D.M. City, Meerut, the complaint was pushed from pillar to post but the F.I.R. was not lodged. 11. Since, the applicant has retired and obtaining sanction under section 197 Cr.P.C. is no more required as per the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the matter of Om Prakash Yadav vs. Niranjan Kumar Upadhyay reported in 224 Live Law SCC 989, wherein in para 82 and 84, it has been held as follows: - "82. It is the case of the IO at Dakshin, Firozabad that sanction for prosecution of the accused respondents was not granted by the D.I.G., Gwalior citing the pendency of Case No. 15003 of 2007 in Case Crime No. 967 of 2007 registered for the offence under the Excise Act before the CJM, Gwalior. However, those proceedings have been stayed by the High Court of Madya Pradesh vide order dated 25.08.2009 and therefore, the question of sanction can be re- visited, if found necessary. 83. As far as respondent no. 1 is concerned, it is made clear that there would be no requirement for sanction since he was not acting in the discharge of his official duty by virtue of not being posted at Murar Police Station, Gwalior at the relevant time when the alleged false case was registered. As a consequence, the extent of the involvement of respondent no. 1 in the alleged conspiracy to murder can be determined by the Trial Court upon a further examination of the evidence adduced before itself. However, so far as the respondent nos. 3, 4 and 5 respectively are concerned, if the case of the prosecution that they had also played a dubious role in registering a false case is correct then the requirement of sanction would not be a sin qua non for proceeding further with the criminal proceedings. However, the defence must be given an opportunity to rebut the same by leading appropriate evidence." 12. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in the matter of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335. This is not a case where no prima facie case is made out which call for interference of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 13. This court does not see any illegality, incorrectness or impropriety in the order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut, and there seem to be no abuse of the Court's process also, therefore, the prayer for quashing of proceedings of Case No. 1751 of 2004, under sections 409, 217 and 201 I.P.C. relating to P.S. Medical College, Meerut is refused. The trial may proceed in accordance with law. 14. In view of the discussion made above, the application filed under section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed off. Order Date :- 14.7.2025 Bhanu Digitally signed by :- BHANU PRATAP KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad