Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:127796 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 24915 of 2025 Applicant :- Vikas Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pavan Kishore Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This application u/s 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as 'BNSS') has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings, including charge-sheet dated 15.03.2024 as well as cognizance / summoning order dated 14.10.2024, of Case No. 17169 of 2024 (State Vs. Vikas Sharma), arising out of Case Crime No.0069 of 2024, under Sections 341, 354, 354(b) IPC, P.S.- Medical College, District- Meerut, pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) / F.T.C., Meerut. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and that first information report has been lodged by the opposite party no.2 making false and baseless allegations. In fact, the applicant has filed a complaint against opposite party no.2 and her husband for offence under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506, 341 IPC on 15.09.2023 and in that complaint they were summoned vide order dated 25.09.2023. One more complaint was filed by wife of applicant against opposite party no.2 and her husband for offence under Sections 341, 504, 506, 354, 392 IPC and in that case also they were summoned vide order dated 09.01.2024. After that the opposite party no.2 has lodged first information report of this case on 23.02.2024 as a counterblast. The version of informant is not supported by any other witness. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that impugned proceedings are malicious and counterblast and thus liable to be quashed. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the application and submitted that informant was a student of M.A. in Yoga in C.C.S. University and applicant was working as yoga teacher there. Later on, the informant has left the said course and after that applicant has started harassing her. It was submitted that on 12.08.2023 the scooty of informant was damaged by the applicant and in that regard a complaint was made to the police, wherein applicant has tendered his apology. After that the applicant has filed the above referred complaint case against opposite party no.2 and her husband in order to harass the informant. It was submitted that a prima-facie case is made out against applicant. 5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record. 6. The legal position on the issue of quashing of criminal proceedings is well-settled that the jurisdiction to quash a complaint, FIR or a charge-sheet should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases. However, where the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and material on record even if taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused, the charge-sheet may be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. In well celebrated judgement reported in AIR 1992 SC 605 State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal, Supreme Court has carved out certain guidelines, wherein FIR or proceedings may be quashed but cautioned that the power to quash FIR or proceedings should be exercised sparingly and that too in the rarest of rare cases. In this connection, a reference may also be made to the case of R. Kalyani vs. Janak C. Mehta and Others, 2009 (1) SCC 516, Rupan Deol Bajaj vs. K.P.S. Gill (1995) SCC (Cri) 1059, Rajesh Bajaj vs. State of NCT of Delhi, (1999) 3 SCC 259 and Medchl Chemicals & Pharma (P) Ltd vs. Biological E Ltd. & Ors, 2000 SCC (Cri) 615. It has been held that if a prima facie case is made out disclosing ingredients of the offence, court should not quash the charge sheet/complaint. It is equally well settled that at this stage questions of fact cannot be examined and a mini trial cannot be held. 7. In the instant matter perusal of record shows that informant has alleged that applicant was working as yoga teacher in C.C.S. University and informant was doing course M.A. in Yoga but later on she left that course. After that the applicant has started harassing her. On 12.08.2023 while informant came out after taking her examination in C.C.S. University, her scooty was damaged by applicant and that matter was reported to the police, wherein applicant has tendered his apology and promised that he would not harass her. After that incident the applicant has filed the above referred complaint case against opposite party no.2 and her husband. One more complaint was also filed by the wife of applicant making similar allegations. The version of informant is supported by medical examination report. In view of these facts and circumstances, it can not be said that no prima-facie case is made out or impugned proceedings are counterblast and liable to be quashed on that ground. The submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant call for determination on questions of fact, which may adequately be discerned / adjudicated only by the trial court. Even the submissions made on point of law can also be more appropriately gone into by the trial court. Adjudication of questions of facts and appreciation of evidence or examining the reliability and credibility of the version, does not fall within the arena of jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS. 8. After considering arguments raised by learned counsel for the parties and perusing the impugned first information report and materials on record, no case for quashing of impugned proceedings is made out. The application under Section 528 BNSS lacks merits and thus, liable to be dismissed. 9. Accordingly, the application u/s 528 BNSS is dismissed. Order Date :- 31.7.2025 'SP'/- Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad