Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:34365 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 7830 of 2025 Applicant :- Saloni And 7 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Dwivedi,Dharmendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been preferred for quashing of entire proceedings, including summoning order dated 06.11.2024, of Complaint Case No.2081 of 2023 (Neha Devi Vs. Ravi and Others), under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452, 354B I.P.C., Police Station- Bindaki, District- Fatehpur, pending before the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C. (CAW), Fatehpur. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that both the parties are related to each other and that on 08.05.2022 the applicant no.1 has lodged a first information report against opposite party no.2 and others for offence under Sections 307, 324, 323, 504 IPC and in that matter charge-sheet has been submitted. After that the opposite party no.2 has lodged impugned complaint against applicants, making false and baseless allegations. There is long delay in filing of the impugned complaint. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that impugned proceedings are malicious and counterblast and thus liable to be quashed. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that in view of allegations made in the complaint and statement of complainant recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and of witnesses recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C., 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. 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, it appears from record that in incident dated 07.05.2022 both the parties have sustained injuries. There are several injured persons from the side of complainant. Regarding that incident, the applicant no.1 has lodged first information report on 08.05.2022 and after that opposite party no.2 has lodged the impugned complaint. The complainant and other injured persons were medically examined in government hospital. In view of facts of the matter, particularly considering the fact that in the alleged incident both sides have sustained injuries and by impugned complaint the opposite party no.2 has put up her cross version of incident dated 07.05.2022, the impugned proceedings can not be quashed. The submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicants 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. Thus, the prayer made above is refused. 8. However, it is directed that in case applicants move an application for discharge within a period of three weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. For a period of three weeks from today and in case such an application is moved within the aforesaid period, till the disposal of such application, no coercive action shall be taken against applicants, provided applicants co-operate in early disposal of the discharge application. 9. The application u/s 528 B.N.S.S. is disposed of in above terms. Order Date :- 10.3.2025 'SP'/- Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad