Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:89732 Court No. - 87 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 31154 of 2024 Applicant :- Kishwar Hussain And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kapil Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri Kapil Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.B. Choudhary, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant application has been filed with a prayer to quash summoning order dated 13.02.2024 and entire proceedings of Sessions Case No.442 of 2024 arising out of Criminal Misc. Case No.292 of 2022 (Nazma vs. Kishwar Hussain and others) u/s 392 IPC, P.S.Bilsi, District-Budaun pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge(Dacoity Affected Area), Budaun or to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case during pendency of the application. 3. In the instant matter, O.P. no.2 has lodged a complaint case against the applicants and four unknown persons on 12.05.2022 wherein it has been alleged that on 06.02.2022 the accused persons entered into her house and asked about jewellery of one Hashmi Begum (who was deceased mausi of husband of O.P. No.2) and when O.P. no.2 did not tell them about the jewellery they had beaten her as well as her son and also looted cash and some ornaments from her house. After adducing evidence, summoning order has been passed on 13.02.2024, which has been assailed in this application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicants are totally innocent and they have not committed any offence as alleged in the complaint. He submitted that it is a no injury case and the instant proceedings initiated by O.P. no.2 is a malicious prosecution. He submitted that for the same incident, O.P. no.2 has also lodged an FIR u/s 325, 323, 504 IPC and investigation is going on. He submitted that for the same incident two criminal proceedings cannot be initiated and the same is pure abuse of process of law. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. submitted that the court below has rightly summoned the applicants and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order as well as the on going proceedings. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. The applicant has brokered the deal or not or whether he has received any amount or not can be adjudged only during the course of trial. The arguments raised by learned counsel for the applicant are all disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court. 8. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matters of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918, R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192, and lastly, Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 has held that only those cases in which no prima facie case is made out can be considered in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 9. The instant application does not fall under the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgments mentioned above, and followed in a number of matters. Moreover, the facts as alleged cannot be said that, prima facie, no offence is made out against the applicants. It is only after the evidence and trial, it can be seen as to whether the offence, as alleged, has been committed or not. 10. However, it is open for the applicants to take all its defence in the trial. 11. Hence, the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be entertained and is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 27.5.2025 Manish Himwan Digitally signed by :- MANISH HIMWAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad