Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:119193 Court No. - 79 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 22874 of 2025 Applicant :- Chandra Shekhar Singh Alias Bhole Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Singh,Rudra Pratap Narain Singh,Vikas Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri Jitendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri N.K. Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. for the State-O.P. no.1 and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicants praying for quashing impugned order dated 19.10.2024 of framing of charge passed by Additional District Judge/Fast Track Court 14th (Finance Commission), Varanasi in S.T. no.911 of 2021 (State vs. Virendra Yadav and others) arising out of Case Crime No.174 of 2024 u/s 147, 148, 149, 302/149, 504, 506 IPC, P.S.Cholapur, District-Varanasi or to stay the effect and operation of order dated 19.10.2024 during pendency of the application. 3. In the instant matter, an FIR was lodged by O.P. no.2 against two accused including present applicant on 18.04.2021 wherein it has been alleged that the accused persons have killed the son of O.P. no.2 due to enmity. After completion of investigation, final report was submitted exonerating the applicant. However, during course of trial an application under section 319 Cr.P.C. was filed by O.P. no.2 and on this application, the present applicant has been summoned. Thereafter, vide order dated 19.10.2024 the trial court has framed charges against the applicant, which has been assailed by means of instant application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicant was exonerated and final report was submitted after completion of investigation. He next submitted that after the applicant was exonerated O.P. no.2 has lodged a complaint case against him, which was also dismissed and against the dismissal of complaint, O.P. no.2 has preferred a criminal revision. He submitted that the aforesaid fact of filing complaint has not been disclosed before the trial court, which shows the conduct of O.P. no.2, who just wanted to implicate the applicant. He further contended that even if the prosecution case is taken to be true, no offence under section 302 IPC is made out against the applicant. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the application and contended that against framing of charges, application under section 528 BNSS is not maintainable. He submitted that the applicant has the remedy to prefer revision against the impugned order. He further argued that charges can be altered at any stage of trial. He further submitted that whether charges under section 302 IPC and other sections are attributable to the applicant or not, can only be adjudicated upon after adducing evidence during course of the trial. It is further submitted that the Court below has rightly passed the impugned order and no interference is required by this Court. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that prima facie no offence is made out against the applicant. The cognizance order has been issued after perusing the material collected during investigation of the case and thereafter, during course of trial, charges have been framed against the applicant by the impugned order. I see no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order, which calls for any interference by this Court. 8. Hence, the instant application lacks merits and is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 22.7.2025 Manish Himwan Digitally signed by :- MANISH HIMWAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad