HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 47701 of 2025 Court No. - 79 HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J. 1. Heard Sri Anand Mohan Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Jyoti Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed for quashing impugned summoning order dated 4.7.2024 as well as entire proceeding of Case No.944 of 2024 (State Vs. Rakesh Singh & Anr.) in N.C.R. No.56 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Nawab, District Farrukhabad, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Farrukhabad. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. The opposite party no. 2 lodged an N.C.R. being N.C.R. No.56 of 2022 under Sections 323 and 504 I.P.C., with the allegations that on 09.06.2022, the applicants assaulted the opposite party no. 2, as a result of which he sustained injuries. The injuries of the opposite party no. 2 were medically examined and were found to be simple in nature. The Investigating Officer, after obtaining necessary permission from the concerned Magistrate, started the investigation. The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the opposite party no. 2 and other witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. After completion of investigation, a charge sheet was filed against the applicants. He further submitted that the charge sheet was filed for non- cognizable offences and the same was treated as a complaint case under Section 2(d) Cr.P.C., and the learned Magistrate, vide order dated Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anand Mohan Pandey, Om Prakash Katiyar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rakesh Singh And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 04.07.2024, summoned the applicants. It is further submitted that no prima facie offence is made out against the applicants and the summoning order has been passed without proper application of judicial mind. Therefore, the impugned order suffers from manifest illegality and infirmity and is liable to be set aside. 4. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the submissions advanced on behalf of the applicants and contended that the learned Magistrate has passed the impugned summoning order strictly in accordance with law. It is submitted that, at the stage of taking cognizance, the Court is only required to examine whether a prima facie case is made out or not. He further submits that the charge sheet has been filed after due investigation and the material collected therein clearly discloses the commission of offences against the applicants. There is no illegality, irregularity, or perversity in the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate. Therefore, the present application is liable to be dismissed. 5. From the record, it transpires that opposite party no. 2 lodged an N.C.R. being N.C.R. No.56 of 2022 under Sections 323 and 504 I.P.C. alleging that on 09.06.2022 the applicants assaulted him, as a result of which he sustained injuries. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer, after obtaining necessary permission from the concerned Magistrate, commenced the investigation. The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of opposite party no. 2 and other witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Upon completion of investigation, a charge sheet was submitted against the applicants. Since the charge sheet related to non-cognizable offences, the same was treated as a complaint case under Section 2(d) Cr.P.C., and the learned Magistrate, vide order dated 04.07.2024, summoned the applicants. The Magistrate has assigned detailed reasons while passing the impugned summoning order. 6. From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of power conferred under Section 528 B.N.S.S. At this stage only NA528 No. 47701 of 2025 2 prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, 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. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. 7. Upon consideration of the material available on record, this Court finds that the learned Magistrate has proceeded in accordance with law. This Court does not find any illegality or perversity in passing the impugned summoning order. Therefore, the prayer for setting aside the same is hereby refused. 8. Accordingly, the application is dismissed. May 7, 2026 Md Faisal NA528 No. 47701 of 2025 3 (Chawan Prakash,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD FAISAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad