Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44794 Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 804 of 2025 Applicant :- Smt. Santosh Verma And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ganga Singh,Arvind Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Adarsh Pratap Singh,Prabhat Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri Ganga Singh, the learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Manish Vikram Singh Chauhan, the learned A.G.A appearing on behalf of the State and Sri Prabhat, learned counsel for the opposite party no.5. 2. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C/528 B.N.S.S, the applicants have sought quashing of the chargesheet dated 13.10.2024 arising out of Case Crime No. 255 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2) B.N.S, Police Station Kotwali Aliganj, District Lucknow as well as summoning order dated 13.02.2025 along with the proceedings of Case No.17131 of 2025 pending before the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, court No. 26, Lucknow. 3. The aforesaid case has been instituted on the basis of an F.I.R lodged by the opposite party no.5 on 24.09.2024 against the applicants and 2-3 unknown persons stating that while a Process Server had come from the Court and the informant was receiving a notice at about 8:30 AM on 24.09.2024, the accused persons, who reside in his neighborhood, started interfering with the Process Server and when the informant objected against it, the accused persons abused him, entered his house and beaten him up. Upon hearing the commotion, the informant's mother, sister, elder brother also came there, the accused persons entered into a scuffle with them also. The informant stated that he had suffered numerous injuries in the incident. 4. After investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted a Charge-sheet dated 24.09.2024 for offences under section 115(2), 352, 351(2) B.N.S, stating that from the statement of the complainant and the witnesses and a perusal of the CCTV footage etc., the offences of section 191(2)/331 B.N.S could not be established and the involvement of 2-3 unknown person in commission of offence was also not established. 5. From the material collected during investigation, commission of offences under sections 115(2), 352, 351(2) B.N.S by the accused persons was established. The trial court has taken cognizance of the offences and had summoned the applicants to face trial. 6. Assailing the validity of the chargesheet and summoning order, the learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the F.I.R alleges that the accused persons had entered the informant's house and had beaten him up. He has further submitted that the allegation of entering into the informant's house could not be established during investigation and, therefore, the entire prosecution story fails and in these circumstances, the Investigating Officer has committed an illegality in submitting the chargesheet and the trial court has erroneously taken cognizance of the offences. 7. Although, the petition seeks quashing of the chargesheet, the material on the basis of which the Investigating Officer has submitted the chargesheet has not been annexed with the application seeking quashing of the chargesheet and the proceedings. 8. The learned A.G.A has produced a copy of the relevant extract of case diary for perusal of the Court, from which it transpired that the informant was examined medically and his medical examination report revealed four injuries caused by hard and blunt object. The statements recorded by the Investigating Officer are also available on the extract of case diary produced before the Court, wherein the F.I.R allegations have been supported. The statements of some eyewitnesses are also there, wherein it is stated that the accused persons had abused and beaten up the informant at his door step causing injuries to him. 9. For submitting a chargesheet, merely this much is required that commission of the alleged offences is prima facie established and the trial court is also merely required to record a satisfaction for trial being made out. 10. From a perusal of the extract of case diary produced before the Court by the learned A.G.A, it is apparent that there is sufficient material to make out a prima facie case regarding commission of the offences in respect of which the chargesheet has been submitted. 11. Merely, because some of the offences alleged in the F.I.R could not be established during investigation and those offences were not included in the chargesheet, it does not imply that the entire prosecution story would stand vitiated and the accused persons have to be exonerated in toto. 12. In view of the forgoing discussions, I do not find any error or illegality in submission of the chargesheet and the trial court taking cognizance of the offences. 13. Accordingly, the application lacks merits in the same is here by dismissed. . (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Order Date :- 1.8.2025 Preeti. Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench