Allahabad High Court
A482/9882/2025 of KUNJ BIHARI Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER on 17 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9882 of 2025 Court No. - 14 HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J. 1. Heard. 2. This application has been filed with the following prayer:- "To quash the summoning order dated 30.04.2024 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9882 of 2025
Court No. - 14
HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard.
2. This application has been filed with the following prayer:- "To quash the summoning order dated 30.04.2024 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate. Lakhimpur Kheri in Case Crime No. 224/2023, u/s 419, 420, 468 I.P.C., Police Station- Neemgaon, District- Lakhimpur Kheri and also to stay the further proceeding arising out of the Charge sheet No. 256/2023, dated 10.09.2023, State Versus Kunj Bihari and others, in Case No. 931/2024, in Case Crime No. 224/2023, u/s 419, 420, 468 I.P.C., Police Station- Neemgaon, District- Lakhimpur Kheri."
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that amount of Rs. 1,20,000/- was taken by the applicant, which was returned to the complainant on 06.04.2023 and 13.04.2023 respectively. He further submits that the F.I.R. of the case in question was lodged on 19.07.2023 on the basis of concocted facts. He next submits that the evidence provided by the applicant was not considered by the Investigating Officer, hence, indulgence of this Court is required.
4. It is well settled that in case the investigation is not done properly by the Investigating Officer, it is always open to the applicant to file application for further investigation before concerned Magistrate. Accordingly, the present application is disposed of with liberty to the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dileep Kumar, Dhananjai Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Kunj Bihari .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s)
applicant to file application for further investigation before the Magistrate within a period of four weeks from today. In case such application is filed by the applicant, same shall be considered and decided within one month.
5. Till outcome of the aforesaid application, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. December 17, 2025 Arpan A482 No. 9882 of 2025 2 (Rajeev Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench