HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 4945 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE DEEPAK VERMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State. 2. The present 528 B.N.S.S. application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated 05.01.2020, cognizance/summoning order dated 05.02.2022 as well as entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.821 of 2022 (State vs. Arun Kumar Singh and others) arising out of Case Crime No.536 of 2019, under sections 354, 323, 504, 506, 294 I.P.C. Police Station Kotwali, District Janpur, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Janupur. 3. It is alleged in the FIR that the applicant no.1(Arun Kumar Singh @ Munna) is husband of opposite party no.2 (Sushma Singh). It is alleged in the FIR that father of the applicant having evil eyes on his daughter-in- law, he pressurizing and tempting her in various ways to have an immoral relationship. On 22.09.2019, the applicant and father-in-law of the opposite party no.2 assaulted her. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and no offence is made out against the applicant. All allegation is against the father-in-law of the opposite party no.2. Informant (opposite party no.2) only to pressurize the applicant to lodge FIR with malice intention. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Mishra, Ratnesh Mishra, Shubham Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Prem Chandra Patel Arun Kumar Singh Alias Munna .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the submission raised by applicant's counsel and submitted that on perusal of statement of the witnesses recorded during investigation, prima-facie discloses offence against the applicant is made out. Sister-in-law and daughter of the informant are also supporting the prosecution case. He next submitted that by order of this Court dated 13.05.2025, matter was referred to Mediation & Conciliation Centre, High Court, Allahabad but parties could not reach to any conclusion/agreement and as per as Mediation report dated 08.08.2025, 'Mediation completed but no agreement'. 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 482 Cr.P.C. 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 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 482 Cr.P.C. 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 NA528 No. 4945 of 2025 2 this Court in exercise of its inherent power under Section 528 B.N.S.S as the same do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity. 7. Considered the submission of both the parties. From the record, it is apparent that the applicant and opposite party no.2 were given opportunity to conciliate the matter but same could not be done. Allegation alleged in the FIR and statement of the witnesses recorded during investigation are supporting the prosecution case. Sister-in-law and daughter of the informant are also supporting the prosecution case. Applicant is husband and his duty to protect her wife. No interference is warranted. The present 528 B.N.S.S. application of applicant- Arun Kumar Singh @ Munna is hereby dismissed with the aforesaid observation. September 15, 2025 SKD NA528 No. 4945 of 2025 3 (Deepak Verma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad