HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 32483 of 2025 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard Sri Ram Tiwari, learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA for State. 2. Present application has been preferred with prayer to quash the proceeding of S.T. no. 251 of 2024 (State vs. Vedprakash) Case Crime no. 310 of 2023 under Section 306 IPC, PS- Baniyather, District Sambhal in pursuance to charge sheet dated 31.3.2024 along with summoning order dated 4.7.2024 and order dated 2.8.2024 by which charge has been framed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/Additional Session Judge, Sambhal at Chandausi. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the impugned framing of summoning order dated 4.7.2024 and charge framing order dated 2.8.2024 has been passed without considering the entirety of the matter. There is no material sufficient against the applicant for framing of the charges, which aspect has not been considered by the Court below. The impugned order is illegal, unjust and contrary to the provision as prescribed in the statute. 4. Learned counsel has further submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Prosecution story does not support the medical evidence and statement of doctor. No offence under Section 306 IPC is made out against the applicant. There is no eye witness of death of deceased. Applicant has not abetted deceased to commit suicide, in fact, informant himself scolded the deceased which resulted into commission of suicide by deceased. The charge sheet as well as impugned order which has been passed by the Court below is without considering the aforesaid aspects. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ram Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Vedprakash .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that the Court below while passing impugned order has considered the case and found sufficient material available on record to frame charge. There is no ground for interference by this Court in the impugned order as well as charge sheet. The present application being devoid of merit be dismissed as such. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Framing of a charge is an exercise of jurisdiction by the trial court in terms of Section 228 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, unless the accused is discharged under Section 227 of the Code. Under both these provisions, the court is required to consider the "record of the case" and documents submitted therewith and, after hearing the parties, may either discharge the accused or where it appears to the court and in its opinion there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence, it shall frame the charge. Once the facts and ingredients of the section exists, then the court would be right in presuming that there is ground to proceed against the accused and frame the charge accordingly. This presumption is not a presumption of law as such. The satisfaction of the court in relation to the existence of constituents of an offence and the facts leading to that offence is a sine qua non for exercise of such jurisdiction. 7. In this case, from perusal of the impugned order, it is apparent that the Court below after perusing the record found that sufficient material is available to frame charges against the applicant, therefore, the impugned charge framing order dated 2.8.2024 has been passed. The assertions of false implication raised by the applicant are factual issues that requires proper adjudication by the trial court based on evidence and cannot be conclusively determined in proceedings under Section 528 BNSS. In proceeding u/s 528 BNSS, this Court is not inclined to hold mini-trial. I do not find any good ground or cogent reason to interfere in the impugned order as well as charge sheet. 8. Accordingly, the instant application is dismissed. October 10, 2025 Shaswat NA528 No. 32483 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad