Vikash Chauhan vs State Of U.P. And Another on 10 September, 2025
7. Considered the submission of both the parties. Reliance placed by applicant upon the judgment of High Court of Bombay in Subramanian K.V. and another vs. State of Maharashtra: 2020 SCC Online Bom 9137, is not applicable in the present case as in that case FIR was registered under sections 274, 275 & 276 I.P.C. and Section 17(B) (d), 17(A)(f), 27(c) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and order has been passed while deciding anticipatory bail application. Present facts of the case and facts of the case narrated in order over which the applicant has placed reliance are entirely different. In the present case, FIR has been lodged under sections 274, 275, 276 & 420 I.P.C. and the offence mentioned in the FIR is very much cognizable by lodging FIR. Moreover, charge has been framed against the applicant by order dated 25.06.2024 but applicant has not challenged the framing of charge order. The framing of charge order dated 25.06.2024 does not contain any illegality, same has been passed after hearing the accused persons/applicant. Cognizance and summoning by learned magistrate is just and proper. No interference is warranted. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application of applicant- Vikash Chauhan is hereby dismissed with the aforesaid observation.