Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:55872 Court No. - 84 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17628 of 2024 Applicant :- Sunil Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard Sri Vinay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State. 2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceedings as well as order dated 02.05.2024 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate Jhansi in Case no. 3033 of 2004 under sections 366 & 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Sipri Bazar, District-Jhansi, pending the of Chief Judicial Magistrate Jhansi, arising out case crime no 848 of 2004, PS. Sipari Bazar District Jhansi. 3. Counsel for the applicants submits that instant FIR has been registered in the year 2004. I.O. without collecting evidence, submitted charge sheet against the applicants. Applicant's challenged the charge sheet by filing 482 application bearing No.684 of 2005 and this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 05.12.2019, disposed off the application on the ground that parties have entered into compromise and directed the parties to appear before concerned Magistrate through appropriate application and learned Magistrate shall record their statements and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. He further submitted that despite notice, none appears on behalf of informant/victim before trial court but applicant is appearing through counsel. 4. The grounds taken in the application reveal that many of them relate to disputed question of fact. This Court is of the view that it is well settled that the appreciation of evidence is a function of the trial court. This Court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot assume such jurisdiction and put an end to the process of trial provided under the law. It is also settled by the Apex Court in catena of judgments that The impugned criminal proceeding against the applicants is abuse of the process of the Court and is liable to be quashed by this Court.the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at pre-trial stage should not be used in a routine manner but it has to be used sparingly, only in such an appropriate cases, where it manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the institution or continuance of the criminal proceedings or where allegations made in First Information Report or charge-sheet and the materials relied in support of same, on taking their face value and accepting in their entirety do not disclose the commission of any offence against the accused. The disputed questions of facts and defence of the accused cannot be taken into consideration at this pre-trial stage. 5. In view of the above, in the light of judgment of the Apex Court in the matters of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, Manik B. Vs. Kadapala Sreyes Reddy and another, 2023 Live Law (SC) 642, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, 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, no ground for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case, is made out which may call for any interference by this Court in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the same do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity. 6. Considering the argument advanced by applicants' counsel and perused the record, it is evident that in pursuance of summoning order dated 02.05.2024, earlier applicant had filed 482 application before this Court, which was decided by this Court vide order dated 05.12.2019 on submission that parties have entered into compromise, thereafter, informant-victim are not appearing on the date fixed. On perusal of statement of victim recorded U/s 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., it is apparent that, prima facie, offence is made out against the applicants. From the record and other material evidence, presumption can be drawn that informant-victim does not want to compromise the matter, therefore, they are not appearing before trial court to compromise the matter. On merit, prima facie, offence is made out against the applicant. No interference is warranted at this stage. 7. The present 482 application of applicants, Sunil Singh and Smt. Rekha, are hereby dismissed with the aforesaid observation. 8. However, if the applicants surrender before the concerned court within three weeks from today and apply for bail, the court below shall decide his bail application in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months from the date of filing of bail application. 9. For the period of three weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicants before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against them. Order Date :- 16.4.2025 Nitin Verma Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad