Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:111474 Court No. - 70 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6865 of 2025 Petitioner :- Bhoodev Swaroop Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Braj Mohan Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to set aside the impugned order dated 01.03.2025 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.11, Agra in Criminal Revision No. 450 of 2024 whereby revision has been rejected affirming the order dated 27.05.2024 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Agar in Criminal Case No. 2701350 of 2019 (State Vs. Sapna and others) by which the discharge application of the petitioner has been rejected. 3. In brief, according to prosecution story, as unfolded in F.I.R., it is alleged that On 29.07.2018, at about 11:00 a.m., the accused- petitioner alongwith other persons blocked the way of the informant and tried to assault him. It is also alleged that in the aforesaid incident first informant/opposite party-2 was abused by accused persons and threats were also extended to him. 4. After registration of afore-mentioned F.I.R., Investigating Officer proceeded with statutory investigation of concerned case crime number in terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C. During course of investigation, Investigating Officer recorded statements of first informant/opposite party-2 and other witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C., who have supported the prosecution story as unfolded in F.I.R. On the basis of above, as well as other material collected by Investigating Officer during course of investigation, which is substantially adverse to accused, Investigating Officer opined to submit a charge-sheet. Accordingly, a charge-sheet No.176 of 2018 dated 14.09.2018 was submitted, whereby and whereunder petitioner and two others have been charge-sheeted under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. Perusal of charge-sheet further goes to show that as many as 5 prosecution witnesses have been nominated therein. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. He further submits that the present criminal proceedings initiated by opposite party no.2 are an after thought, as such the same is not only malicious but also amount to an abuse of the process of the Court. He further submits that the concerned court below has rejected the discharge application of the petitioner without assigning any reason by order dated 27.05.2024. He further submits that against the said order a revision has been preferred but learned revisional court also rejected the revsion on 01.03.2025 in a mechanical manner affirming the order dated 27.05.2024, therefore, the impugned orders passed by the concerned court below are illegal and the same are liable to be quashed by this Court. 6. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. submits that the impugned orders are perfectly legal, just and proper which calls for no interference by this Court. 7. The submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner call for adjudication on pure questions of fact which may be adequately adjudicated upon only by the trial court and while doing so even the submissions made on points of law can also be more appropriately gone into by the trial court in this case. This Court does not deem it proper, and therefore cannot be persuaded to have a pre-trial before the actual trial begins. A threadbare discussion of various facts and circumstances, as they emerge from the allegations made against the accused, is being purposely avoided by the Court for the reason, lest the same might cause any prejudice to either side during trial. But it shall suffice to observe that the perusal of the F.I.R. and the material collected by the Investigating Officer on the basis of which the charge sheet has been submitted makes out a prima facie case against the accused at this stage and this Court does not find any justifiable ground to set aside the impugned order refusing the discharge of the accused. This court has not been able to persuade itself to hold that no case against the accused has been made out or to hold that the charge is groundless. 8. The prayer for quashing or setting aside the impugned orders dated 01.03.2025 and 27.05.2024 are refused as I do not see any illegality, impropriety and incorrectness in the impugned order or the proceedings under challenge. There is absolutely no abuse of court's process perceptible in the same. The present matter also does not fall in any of the categories recognized by the Supreme Court which might justify interference by this Court in order to upset or quash them. 9. With the above observations, this application is rejected. Order Date :- 11.7.2025 AS Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad