Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:69357 Court No. - 52 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 7050 of 2025 Applicant :- Arun Kumar Tiwari @ Pappu Pandit And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Giri,Surendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- Dharmendra Kumar,G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records. 2. This application U/S 528 BNSS has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated 22.06.2024 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 1646 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 0059 of 2024, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C. and 3(Va), 3(1)(द), 3(1)(ध) SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Hamirpur, pending in the court of Special Judge SC/ST Act, Hamirpur. 3. Brief facts of the case are that an F.I.R. was lodged by opposite party no.2 on 14.03.2024 at 13:05 hours with the allegations that her brother Santosh Kumar is a e-rickshaw driver. On 13.03.2024 at about 11 P.M. in the night Pappu Pandit came to their house and took away her brother along with e-rickshaw to their residence. There was a dispute between the two regarding the fare. Pappu Pandit, his nephew and four unknown persons started abusing and insulting him and used caste indicative words. When he protested, all of them beat him badly with lathi, danda and axes, due to which he suffered serious head injuries and thinking Santosh to be dead, they fled from the spot. After investigation charge-sheet has been submitted and the concerned Magistrate summoned the applicants to face trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. There is nothing on record to show that any such incident took place as is alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that the incident is of 13.03.2024, however, medical examination of the injured has been conduced after nearly three weeks of the incident and as per the medical report no serious injuries have been found on the body of the injured, therefore, no offence under the relevant section is made out. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicants to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against them. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicants have also been touched upon at length. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State submits that from the version of the complaint, statements of charge-sheet witnesses, statement of the Doctor, who has conducted medical examination of the injured as well as medical report of the injured proves the alleged incident. They further submit that from the perusal of the 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 by the counsel for the applicants, relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 528 BNSS. 6. This Court is not unmindful of the following judgements of the Apex Court: (i) R.P. Kapur Versus State of Punjab AIR 1960 SC 866; (ii) State of Haryana & Ors. Versus Ch. Bhajan Lal & Ors.1992 Supp.(1) SCC 335; (iii) State of Bihar & Anr. Versus P.P. Sharma & Anr. 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 222; (iv) Zandu Pharmaceuticals Works Ltd. & Ors. Versus Mohammad Shariful Haque & Anr. 2005 (1) SCC 122; (v) M. N. Ojha Vs. Alok Kumar Srivastava 2009 (9) SCC 682; (vi) Mohd. Allauddin Khan Vs. The State of Bihar & Others (2019 ) Supreme (SC) 454; (vii) Nallapareddy Sridhar Reddy Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. (2020) Supreme (SC) 45; (viii) Rajeev Kaurav Vs. Balasahab & Others (2020 ) Supreme (SC) 143, and (ix) M/s Neeharika, Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. The State of Maharashtra (2021) SCC OnLine SC 315. 7. In view of the aforesaid, this Court does not deem it proper, and therefore cannot be persuaded to have a pre-trial before the actual trial begins. A threadbare discussion of various facts and circumstances, as they emerge from the allegations made against the accused, is being purposely avoided by the Court for the reason, lest the same might cause any prejudice to either side during trial. But it shall suffice to observe that the perusal of the F.I.R. and the material collected by the Investigating Officer on the basis of which the charge sheet has been submitted makes out a prima facie case against the accused at this stage and there appear to be sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. I do not find any justification to quash the charge sheet or the proceedings against the applicants arising out of them as the case does not fall in any of the categories recognized by the Apex Court which may justify their quashing. 8. The prayer for quashing the impugned charge-sheet dated 22.06.2024 as well as the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case are refused, as I do not see any abuse of the court's process at this pre-trial stage. 9. The present application has no merit and is, accordingly, rejected. There shall be no order as to costs. Order Date :- 1.5.2025 Abhishek Singh Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad