Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:78721 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 5255 of 2025 Applicant :- Manish And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sitesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- Chandra Bhushan Prasad,Firoz Ahmad Khan,G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This application under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as BNSS) has been filed for quashing of entire proceedings, including summoning order dated 08.11.2024, of Complaint Case No.3225 of 2022 (Man Singh Vs. Manish and Others), under Sections 147, 323, 324 I.P.C., Police Station- Fatehpursikri, District- Agra, pending before the Court of A.C.J.M., Court No.7, Agra. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that regarding a dispute over the amount to be received under MGNREGA, the opposite party no.2 has lodged first information report on 17.09.2021 for offence under Sections 147, 323, 324, 504, 506 IPC. During investigation, both the parties have compromised the matter and the complainant has submitted an affidavit to that effect. It was submitted that on the basis of said compromise, police have submitted final report in favour of applicants. Later, the opposite party no.2 / complainant has filed a protest petition, which was registered as a complaint case and applicants were summoned. During investigation of the matter by police, the complainant has not filed any medical examination report. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that once during investigation, the complainant has compromised the matter, thus the proceedings are abuse of the process of Court and thus liable to be quashed. 4. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has opposed the application and submitted that the complainant has not entered into any compromise with applicants during investigation. The alleged affidavit of compromise relied by applicants is a forged document. It was submitted that in the alleged incident, the complainant and one Mohar Singh have sustained several injuries and that the injury reports filed by complainant in complaint case have not been filed by the applicants. Referring to statement of complainant and of witnesses, it was submitted that a prima-facie case is made out against the applicants. 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. 7. In the instant matter, perusal of record shows that the opposite party no.2 has lodged first information report against applicants alleging that he has worked under MGNREGA scheme but his payment was transferred into account of applicant accused Manish and in that connection he has made complaint. It was further alleged that on 17.09.2021 applicants have abused and assaulted the complainant and when his nephew Mohar Singh tried to save, he was also assaulted by them and said Mohar Singh has sustained injuries at his head. The applicant Manish has attacked the complainant with axe. It appears that police have submitted final report on the basis of compromise between the parties but later a protest petition was filed. The alleged compromise is being disputed by the learned counsel for opposite party no.2 / complainant. It appears from impugned order that injured Mohar Singh has sustained injuries in the incident but his injury report has not been filed. The version of complainant is supported by the witnesses examined under Section 202 Cr.P.C. 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 complaint and the materials in support of the same, 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 :- 14.5.2025 'SP'/- Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad