Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:111439 Court No. - 72 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19638 of 2024 Applicant :- Dileep Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohan Lal Pandey,Sachchidanand Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State. 2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 15.05.2023, cognizance order dated 25.09.2023, summoning order dated 26.09.2023 passed by Judicial Magistrate-IV, Gorakhpur as well as the entire proceeding of Case No. 858 of 2023 (State vs. Pranava Punj Shukla), arising out of Case Crime No. 609 of 2022, under Sections 379, 411 IPC, Police Station- Compierganj, District- Gorakhpur, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate -IIIrd, Gorakhpur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. All allegations alleged in the first information report are false, baseless and not supported by any cogent evidence. No offence under alleged sections is made out. Cognizance/Summoning order passed by learned Magistrate, is without application of his judicial mind and the same is liable to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State submitted that considering the material evidences and allegations against the applicant on record, as on date, as per prosecution case, the cognizable offence against the applicant is made out. Under the facts and circumstances of the present case as well as materials on record against the applicant, the criminal proceedings against the applicant cannot be said to be abuse of process of Court. There is no illegality in the impugned summoning order and instant 482 Cr.P.C. application is liable to be dismissed. 5. After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the entire record, 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 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 case, where on the face of record, the criminal proceeding is clear abuse of the process of the Court. The disputed questions of facts and defence of the accused cannot be taken into consideration at this pre-trial stage. 6. It is also well settled that at the stage of summoning the accused, the court below is not required to go into the merit and demerit of the case. Genuineness or otherwise of the allegation cannot be even determined at the stage of summoning the accused. There is no good ground to invoke inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by this Court at this stage. The relief as claimed by the applicant through this application is refused. 7. The defence version of the applicant has to be considered by the court concerned at the appropriate stage. The accused/applicant has statutory remedy of moving discharge application before the court concerned at the appropriate stage. 8. Considering the material on record, it is directed that, if objection/discharge application is filed on behalf of the applicant before the court concerned within thirty days, it is expected that the court concerned will consider and decide the same expeditiously within a period of two months in accordance with law. 9. With the aforesaid observations/directions, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands disposed of. Order Date :- 11.7.2025 Aditya Digitally signed by :- ADITYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad