Mohammad Navi and Others v. Asadullah Khan), before the Nayab Tehsildar, Bisalpur, District Pilibhit, in whic

1. Heard Sri Raja Ullah Khan, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Neelkanth Upadhyay, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-O.P. no.1 and perused the record.

2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants praying for quashing charge sheet dated 02-09- 2024, cognizance order dated 25-10-2024 as well as entire proceedings of case no. 2184 of 2024 (State Vs. Mohammad Navi and others) arising out of case crime no. 294 of 2024, under Sections 420 and 193 IPC, P.S. Bisalpur, district Pilibhit.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in the instant case, opposite party no. 2 lodged an F.I.R. on 14.06.2024 against the applicants, alleging that they forged the thumb impression of the complainant on a notice/summon in a pending civil case under Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, being Case No. T- 202212560208500 (Mohammad Navi and Others vs. Asadullah Khan), before the Nayab Tehsildar, Bisalpur, District Pilibhit, in which the complainant is an objector. It is further alleged that the applicants procured an ex parte order by using the forged summon and also fabricated an affidavit in the name of a deceased person, namely Reyasat Ullah. After investigation, the police submitted the charge sheet on 02.09.2024, and cognizance was taken on 25.10.2024. The applicants have challenged the charge sheet as well as the cognizance order by means of the instant application. Learned counsel further submits that the applicants have never committed any offence as alleged against them. He contends that the F.I.R. has been lodged maliciously to harass the applicants, who are merely pairokars in the said civil proceedings, and that the case is essentially a civil dispute being given a criminal colour.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the application and contended that from perusal of the F.I.R it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants and the Court below has rightly taken cognizance against the applicant and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order as well as the on going proceedings.

5. 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. 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. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court.

6. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 has laid down the guidelines under which circumstances the Court should, in its inherent power, entertain an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The guidelines are as follows:- "(i) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (ii) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (iii) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (iv) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (v) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (vi) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the Act concerned (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the Act concerned, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (vii) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fides and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."

7. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of 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.

8. 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.

9. Hence, the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be entertained and is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 18.4.2025

1. Heard Sri Raja Ullah Khan, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Neelkanth Upadhyay, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-O.P. no.1 and perused the record.

2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants praying for quashing charge sheet dated 02-09- 2024, cognizance order dated 25-10-2024 as well as entire proceedings of case no. 2184 of 2024 (State Vs. Mohammad Navi and others) arising out of case crime no. 294 of 2024, under Sections 420 and 193 IPC, P.S. Bisalpur, district Pilibhit.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in the instant case, opposite party no. 2 lodged an F.I.R. on 14.06.2024 against the applicants, alleging that they forged the thumb impression of the complainant on a notice/summon in a pending civil case under Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, being Case No. T- 202212560208500 (Mohammad Navi and Others vs. Asadullah Khan), before the Nayab Tehsildar, Bisalpur, District Pilibhit, in which the complainant is an objector. It is further alleged that the applicants procured an ex parte order by using the forged summon and also fabricated an affidavit in the name of a deceased person, namely Reyasat Ullah. After investigation, the police submitted the charge sheet on 02.09.2024, and cognizance was taken on 25.10.2024. The applicants have challenged the charge sheet as well as the cognizance order by means of the instant application. Learned counsel further submits that the applicants have never committed any offence as alleged against them. He contends that the F.I.R. has been lodged maliciously to harass the applicants, who are merely pairokars in the said civil proceedings, and that the case is essentially a civil dispute being given a criminal colour.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the application and contended that from perusal of the F.I.R it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants and the Court below has rightly taken cognizance against the applicant and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order as well as the on going proceedings.

5. 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. 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. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court.

6. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 has laid down the guidelines under which circumstances the Court should, in its inherent power, entertain an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The guidelines are as follows:- "(i) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (ii) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (iii) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (iv) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (v) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (vi) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the Act concerned (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the Act concerned, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (vii) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fides and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."

7. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of 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.

8. 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.

9. Hence, the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be entertained and is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 18.4.2025