Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:129538 Court No. - 91 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 14370 of 2025 Applicant :- Avaneesh Pandey @ Chhotu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amitesh Kumar Srivastava,Pradeep Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Ms. Sunita Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shahsi Dhar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant application has been filed with a prayer to quash the charge-sheet dated 03-09-2022, cognizance order dated 13- 01-2023 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 1955 of 2023, arising out of case crime no. 231 of 2021, under Sections 323, 427, 506, 406 IPC, P.S. Mehnagar, district Azamgarh. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated despite there being no prior relationship, transaction, or connection between the applicant and opposite party no. 2. The applicant has neither received any money in cash nor in his bank account, and there is no credible witness to the alleged transaction of Rs. 34,000/-. Further, no complaint was ever made earlier by opposite party no. 2 or his father against the applicant. After investigation, the police submitted the charge sheet on 03.09.2022, and thereafter, the learned Magistrate took cognizance mechanically, without applying judicial mind and without any supporting documentary evidence. It is contended that the F.I.R., lodged after an unexplained delay of nearly four months, is based on false and frivolous allegations made after consultation and deliberation, without mentioning a specific date and time of the incident. It is further argued that the entire prosecution case is a cooked-up story, initiated with malafide intent to pressurize the applicant into a compromise, and thus, continuation of criminal proceedings amounts to abuse of the process of law. 4. Per contra, Sri Shashi Dhar Pandey, learned A.G.A., submitted that the contents of the F.I.R. and the statements of the complainant and other witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. are fully corroborated, and that Rs. 1,800/- was stolen from the shop of the complainant and the shop was also damaged. He further submitted that the allegations in the F.I.R. clearly state that the applicant had taken money from opposite party no. 2 and, when asked to return it, caused damage to the shop and issued threats to life. It was also argued that the court below has rightly taken cognizance against the applicant, and no interference is warranted by this Court in the impugned order or the ongoing proceedings. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. The arguments raised by learned counsel for the applicants are all disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court. 7. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matters of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918, R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192, and lastly, Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 has held that only those cases in which no prima facie case is made out can be considered in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 8. The instant application does not fall under the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgments mentioned above, and followed in a number of matters. Moreover, the facts as alleged cannot be said that, prima facie, no offence is made out against the applicants. It is only after the evidence and trial, it can be seen as to whether the offence, as alleged, has been committed or not. 9. However, it is open for the applicants to take all its defence in the trial. 10. Hence, the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be entertained and is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 1.8.2025 pks Digitally signed by :- PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad