Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:52113 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23111 of 2024 Applicant :- Ikkan Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Misra,Mohammad Umar Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned Charge Sheet dated 22.09.2018 No. 246 of 2018 alongwith the cognizance/summoning order dated 27.10.2018, passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-III, District Mathura as well as entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 7339 of 2018, (State Vs. Ikkan Khan), arising out of Case Crime No. 0332 of 2018, under Section 3/4 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, Police Station- Mant, District -Mathura. 3. That the brief facts of the case as mentioned in the F.I.R. is that Khasra No. 124/27/70 measuring area 1.263 hectare situated at Village Mantraja, Police Station Mant, Tehsil Mant, District Matura, is recorded as Gram Shabha land in revenue records. In the aforesaid land the applicant has illegally made cultivation and on several occasions his illegal possession was removed with the help of the administration, but due to intention to cause damages to the public property the applicant has again and again taken possession over the property in question and he is not ready to leave the possession from the aforesaid Gram Shabha land. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that charge- sheet has been filed without there being any evidence whatsoever against the applicant. He has further submitted that there is no evidence whatsoever in support of the charge sheet neither there is any material to frame the charge against the applicant nor the proceeding can fruitfully be continued against him. Accordingly, this proceeding which emanated from an F.I.R. lodged under Section 3/4 Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, 1984 is nothing but abuse of process of the Court and therefore, the impugned criminal proceeding be quashed. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant application and supported the order impugned alongwith the charge-sheet. 6. From the perusal of the 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. All the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 7. The submissions made by the applicants' counsel 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 the 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 applicant-accused, is being purposely avoided by the Court for the reason, lest the same might cause any prejudice to either side during trial. Therefore, this Court does not find any justification to quash the proceedings against the applicant as the case does not fall in any of the categories recognized by the Apex Court which may justify their quashing. 8. Accordingly, the prayer for quashing the same is refused, as this Court does not find any illegality, impropriety and incorrectness in the proceedings under challenged. There is no abuse of Court's process either. 9. In view of aforementioned facts and circumstances, there is hardly any scope of interference at this stage. The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands dismissed accordingly. Order Date :- 9.4.2025 Vikram Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad