Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:39515 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22022 of 2024 Applicant :- Sachin Tyagi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Salman Ahmad,Sharik Nadeem Counsel for Opposite Party :- Alok Mishra,G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and Sri Anuj Tripathi, Advocate holding brief of Sri Alok Mishra, learned counsel for respondent no.3 as well as learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant application has been preferred with a prayer to quash the orders dated 07.03.2024 and 09.07.2012 passed by learned Special Judge, Electricity Act, Aligarh in Case No.627 of 2012 (State Vs. Sachin Tyagi), arising out of Case Crime No.289 of 2011, under Section 135, 138 Electricity Act, P.S. Dando, District Aligarh as well as chargesheet dated 28.12.2011 preferred in the said case. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submitted that applicant has never committed the alleged offence which was registered in shape of Case Crime No.289 of 2011, under Section 135, 138 Electricity Act, P.S. Dando, District Aligarh against the applicant. Learned counsel for applicant further submitted that the said offence was committed by one Sachin Tyagi S/o Mahendra Singh Tyagi R/o Barhana, P.S. Narsena, District Bulandshahar who was working as Technician in the Indus Company of Vodafone Tower. It has also been submitted by learned counsel for applicant that the applicant was made accused only because his name and parentage are same to the original accused whereas applicant is resident of Village Kisaula, P.S. Siyana, District Bulandshahar. Learned counsel for applicant further submitted that during investigation, the concerned Investigating Officer recorded statement of prosecution witnesses through which a mobile number 9756795166 related to the accused came into light whereupon the concerned Investigating Officer made call and after some conversation, he came on conclusion the the applicant herein is the real culprit but neither the said mobile number belongs to applicant nor the same has ever been used by him. Learned counsel for applicant also submitted that without conducting fair trial by the concerned Investigating Officer, he submitted chargesheet against the applicant whereupon cognizance was taken vide impugned order dated 09.07.2012 and since the applicant was unknown to the said case, he never appeared before the concerned court whereupon, NBW has been issued against him vide impugned order dated 07.03.2024. When police persons raided the house of applicant, then he came to know that he was implicated in the said case, thereafter he challenged orders dated 07.03.2024 and 09.07.2012 alongwith said chargesheet through the instant petition. 4. Learned counsel for applicant submitted that this case is a glaring example of false implication of the applicant as well as misuse of process of law and only to save the skin of real accused, the concerned Investigating Officer made applicant accused in the said case without conducting fair investigation and as such, orders dated 07.03.2024 and 09.07.2012 alongwith chargesheet submitted in the present case, may be set aside. 5. Per contra, earned counsel for respondent no.3 and learned AGA for the State vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the application and submitted that after conducting the detailed inquiry, chargesheet has been submitted by the concerned Investigating Officer whereupon considering the material on record, learned trial court taken cognizance and as such, there is no illegality in the order impugned. 6. Be that as it may, since the applicant is having liberty to prefer discharge application before the learned court concerned taking all the pleas and grounds which have been raised herein, therefore, he should approach the learned court concerned by way of filing discharge application. 7. Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the issue, the present petition is hereby disposed of finally permitting the applicant to prefer discharge application before the learned court concerned through his counsel taking all pleas and grounds, which are available to him, within four weeks from today alongwith certified copy of this order. If such application is filed by applicant before the learned court concerned, the court concerned shall consider and decide the said application, strictly in accordance with law, by speaking and reasoned order and by affording proper opportunity of hearing to the concerning parties. However, it is made clear that till the disposal of the discharge application, applicant shall not be compelled to appear in person pursuant to the aforesaid criminal case. 8. In compliance to the earlier order dated 28.02.2025 passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court directing the concerned Investigating Officer to appear in person before this Court, is complied with since the then Investigating Officer, namely, S.I. Vasudev Singh who has now been retired from service, is present in person before the Court, his personal appearance is hereby dispensed with. Order Date :- 18.3.2025 Vivek Kr. Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad