HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 5453 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE DEEPAK VERMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State. 2. The present 528 BNSS application has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Session Trial No.728 of 2024, (State Vs. Rajendra Rathor and others), under section 306 of IPC, Police Station Kalyanpur, District- Kanpur Nagar, arising out of Case Crime No.276 of 2023, Pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court Mo-12, Kanpur Nagar. 3. Counsel for the applicants submits that instant petition has been filed to quash the proceedings pending against the applicants. Applicants' counsel has placed reliance over the deposition of prosecution witness recorded during trial proceedings and submits that on perusal of statement recorded by trial court of the prosecution witnesses, prima facie, discloses no offence against the applicants. Proceedings against the applicants is bad in the eyes of law and is not tenable. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the submission raised by applicants' counsel. 5. The grounds taken in the application reveal that many of them relate to disputed question of fact. This Court is of the view that it is well settled that the appreciation of evidence is a function of the trial court. This Court in exercise of power under Section 528 BNSS cannot assume such jurisdiction and put an end to the process of trial provided under the law. It is also settled by the Apex Court in catena of judgments that The impugned criminal Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kapil Tyagi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rajendra Rathor And 2 Othrs .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) proceeding against the applicants is abuse of the process of the Court and is liable to be quashed by this Court.the power under Section 528 BNSS at pre- trial stage should not be used in a routine manner but it has to be used sparingly, only in such an appropriate cases, where it manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the institution or continuance of the criminal proceedings or where allegations made in First Information Report or charge-sheet and the materials relied in support of same, on taking their face value and accepting in their entirety do not disclose the commission of any offence against the accused. The disputed questions of facts and defence of the accused cannot be taken into consideration at this pre-trial stage. 6. In view of the above, in the light of judgment of the Apex Court in the matters of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, Manik B. Vs. Kadapala Sreyes Reddy and another, 2023 Live Law (SC) 642, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283, no ground for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case, is made out which may call for any interference by this Court in exercise of its inherent power under Section 528 BNSS as the same do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity. 7. Considered the submissions advanced by applicants' counsel and perused the record, the submission of applicants' counsel is not acceptable at this stage. The Court while sitting in jurisdiction of 482 and having no power to exercise the power of the trial court and examine the statement of witnesses. No interference is warranted. 8. The present 528 BNSS application of applicants, namely, Rajendra Rathor, Smt. Rajeshwari @ Kisana and Rajni, is hereby dismissed with the aforesaid observation. September 18, 2025 Nitin Verma NA528 No. 5453 of 2025 2 (Deepak Verma,J.) Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad