ORAL ORDER

1. Heard Mr. Indravadan Parmar, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Chintan Dave, learned APP for the respondent State.

2. Present application is filed by the applicant under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C”) seeking to quash and set aside the chargesheet No.94/2020 and entire proceedings of a Criminal Case No.12235/2020 pending on the file of the learned 14th Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that it is the consistent practice of this Court that once the chargesheet is filed, petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C is to be withdrawn and fresh application is being filed. Hence, the Court should entertain and consider such application.

4. At the outset, it is worth to mention that, present application is a successive quashing petition/application. Earlier, the applicant had filed Criminal Misc. Application No.19191/2020, which came to be disposed of as withdrawn vide order dated 23.06.2023. The order dated 23.06.2023 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court reads as under:-

“Charge-sheet is already filed. Learned advocate for the applicants, on instructions, seeks permission to withdraw this application, with a view to file fresh application or avail appropriate remedy available under the law. Permission, as prayed for, is granted. This application is disposed of as withdrawn. Rule is discharged. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated.”

5. As present petition is a successive petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C, this Court raised a specific query to the learned advocate for the applicant that the chargesheet is filed on 24.08.2020 and then it is withdrawn on 23.06.2023 and on that day, the ground of filing of charge-sheet was very much available to the petitioner, then why it was withdrawn. Even after filing of the chargesheet during pendency of the petition under Section 482 of the Code, is maintainable.

6. Considering the facts of the case as well as the contention taken by the applicant, this Court is not inclined to consider the present application in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhisham Lal Verma Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1399 as earlier petition was filed in the year 2019 and during pendency of that earlier application, charge-sheet is filed on 24.08.2020 and application was withdrawn vide order dated 23.06.2023. Considering the fact that during a span of three years, though amendment was carried out, no any ground was taken in the earlier petition and simply earlier petition was withdrawn with a view “to avail appropriate remedy” under the law and in the opinion of this Court, filing of fresh petition under section 482 of the Cr.P.C cannot be construed as appropriate remedy.

7. It is true that it is permissible to exercise power under Section 482 of the CrPC though charge-sheet is filed. Herein, case is slightly different. Though, ground was available and though charge-sheet was filed in the year 2020, earlier petition was withdrawn on 23.06.2023. There is no doubt about the settled proposition of law to exercise power under Section 482 of the CrPC after filing of charge-sheet, but considering the peculiar facts of the case on hand and in light of the law laid down in the case of Bhisham Lal Verma (Supra), it does not mean to file a second petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C by only adding C.C. number in the prayer clause, which is nothing, but window dressing.

8. Even otherwise, as the charge-sheet is filed, at this stage, Court should not arbitrarily evaluate the material collected during investigation and hold mini trial. In view of the above, as the charge- sheet is filed, it is profitable to refer to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Iqbal alias Bala and Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others reported in (2023)8 SCC 734, wherein i