Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:31031 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2166 of 2025 Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Chandrika Patel,Syed Fahim Ahmed Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Supplementary Affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Syed Fahim Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Indrajeet Singh Yadav, learned A.G.A., who appears for the State. 3. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure preferred by the applicant for quashing the charge sheet dated 12.9.2022 submitted by the Investigating Officer against the applicant in Case Crime No.154 of 2020, under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of I.P.C., District Police Station Kotwali Nagar, Ayodhya as well as Bailable Warrant dated 16.02.2024 passed by Additional Session Judge/Special (Prevention of Corruption Act), Court No.5, Gorakhpur, as well as the entire proceedings of Session Case No.2080 of 2022: State Vs. Vinod Kumar Singh (pending before the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), Court No.5, Gorakhpur) in relation to Case Crime No.154 of 2020, under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Ayodhya including the impugned cognizance and summoning order dated 23.11.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), Court No.5, Gorakhpur in the above mentioned case. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that O.P. No.2 lodged a criminal case under Section 113(1)(a), 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act and Sections 471, 120-B, 420, 468 and 467 of IPC against the applicant and other co-accused with an allegation that the applicant committed forgery while getting his name included in the select list for a job while deleting other names. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he is just a candidate, who has been selected. He further submits that the applicant is innocent and he has no role to play. He next submits that the applicant may be accorded liberty to move appropriate application seeking enlargement on bail before the court below. 5. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that the applicant is a beneficiery and bungling has been done and it is a classic case of Section 420 IPC, but he has no objection if permission is accorded to him for moving appropriate application seeking bail before the court below. 6. Considering the submissions raised at the Bar and the statements so sought to be made by them, the application stands consigned to record while observing that in case appropriate proceeding in the form of bail application is preferred before the court below, then the same shall be decided with most expedition strictly in accordance with the law of the land keeping in view the judgment in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2022) 10 SCC 51. Order Date :- 5.3.2025 N.S.Rathour (Vikas Budhwar, J) Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad