Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:110 Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11665 of 2024 Applicant :- Pankaj Yadav @ Prem Prakash Yadav And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko.

And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Avinash Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

1. Heard Sri Avinash Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

2. The present application has been filed for the following main reliefs:-

"For the facts, reasons and circumstances as stated in the accompanying affidavit it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside/quash the charge sheet No. 06/2014 dated 27.1.2014 in Criminal Case No. 238/2014, Crime No. 175/2013 under section 174A I.P.C. P.S. Ram Janmbhumi, Adyodhya Faizabad as contained in Annexure No. 1 to the affidavit.

It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct to stay the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 238/2014, Crime No. 175/2013 under section 174A I.P.C. P.S. Ram Janmbhumi, Adyodhya Faizabad pending in the court of Civil Judge (S.D)-II, Faizabad /Ayodhya "State Vs. Pankaj Yadav, during pendency of the petition, in the interest of justice."

3. It is stated that the proceedings under Section 174-A IPC pending before the trial Court based upon the FIR is unsustainable in the eyes of law particularly in view of provisions as envisaged under Section 195 IPC.

4. It is further submitted that Division Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 17560 of 2023 (Sumit And Another vs. State of U.P. And 2 Others) held that proceedings under Section 174-A IPC can be initiated only on the basis of written complaint of the Court and not on the basis of Police report. Reference can be made to Para 8 to 23 of the judgment, which are extracted hereinunder:-

"8. Before dealing with the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners that the F.I.R. u/s 174-A I.P.C. is barred by Section 195 Cr.P.C., it will be appropriate to discuss the legal provision, involved in the present case. Section 195 Cr.P.C. which prohibits the Court from taking cognizance of any offence punishable u/s 172 to 188 I.P.C., is being quoted below:-

"195. Prosecution for contempt of lawful authority of public servants, for offences against public justice and for offences relating to documents given in evidence.

(1) No Court shall take cognizance-

(a) (i) of any offence punishable under sections 172 to 188 (both inclusive) of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860 ), or (ii) of any abetment of, or attempt to commit, such offence, or (iii) of any criminal conspiracy to commit such offence, except on the complaint in writing of the public servant concerned or of some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate;

(b) (i) of any offence punishable under any of the following sections of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), namely, sections 193 to 196 (both inclusive), 199, 200, 205 to 211 (both inclusive) and 228, when such offence is alleged to have been committed in, or in relation to, any proceeding in any Court, or (ii) of any offence described in section 463, or punishable under section 471, section 475 or section 476, of the said Code, when such offence is alleged to have been committed in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in any Court, or (iii) of any criminal conspiracy to commit, or attempt to commit, or the abetment of, any offence specified in sub-

clause (i) or sub- clause (ii), except on the complaint in writing of that Court, or of some other Court to which that Court is subordinate.

(2) Where a complaint has been made by a public servant under clause (a) of sub- section (1) any authority to which he is administratively subordinate may order the withdrawal of the complaint and send a copy of such order to the Court; and upon its receipt by the Court, no further proceedings shall be tak