Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:47785 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 10109 of 2025 Applicant :- Raj Pal @ Raju Kashyap & Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Through Its Secretary Home U.P At Lucknow And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Binod Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. This application u/s - 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings, including summoning order dated 25.04.2017, of Case No. 332 of 2017, arising out of Complaint Case No. 45 of 2015 (Harshvardhan Vs. Raj Pal and Another), under Sections - 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station - Kotwali Nagar, District - Etah, pending in the court of Special Judge, Dacoity Affected Area, Etah. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that impugned complaint has been lodged by the opposite party no.2/complainant making false and baseless allegations. On 12.12.2014 the wife of applicant no.1 has lodged a first information report against opposite party no.2 for offence under Section - 452, 504, 354-Ka, 323, 506 I.P.C. and after two months of the same, the opposite party no.2 has lodged the impugned complaint showing a false incident of 22.11.2014. The injuries shown to the wife of complainant are simple in nature. Learned counsel has referred the facts of the matter and statement of complainant and of witnesses and submitted that the impugned proceedings are malicious and counter blast and thus, liable to be quashed. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that in view of the allegations made in the complaint and in the statement of complainant, recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C., as well as in the statements 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. At the outset, it may be mentioned that applicants were summoned by summoning order dated 25.04.2017 and it has been pointed out that applicants are on bail and thus, they have knowledge about the summoning order. This application under Section - 528 B.N.S.S. has been preferred after about seven years. It is correct that no period of limitation has been prescribed for an application under Section - 528 B.N.S.S. but it is well settled that such an application has to be filed within a reasonable period. Thus, it is apparent that this application under Section- 528 B.N.S.S. is suffering from vice of gross delay and latches on the part of the applicants. 7. 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 judgment 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. 8. In the instant matter, it appears from record that regarding an incident dated 22.11.2014, the wife of applicant no.1 has lodged a first information report against opposite party no.2, and regarding the same incident the opposite party no.2 has lodged the impugned complainant. In the alleged incident, both the parties have sustained injuries. As many as seven injuries have been shown to the wife of the opposite party no.2/complainant. The complainant has supported the said version in his statement, recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. The version of complainant is further supported by the witnesses examined under Section - 202 Cr.P.C. In view of material on record, it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants. The submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicants call for determination on questions of fact which may be adequately adjudicated upon only by the trial court and even the submissions made on points of law can also be more appropriately gone into only 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 B.N.S.S. 9. After considering arguments raised by learned counsel for parties and perusing the impugned complaint and the materials in support of the same, this Court does not find it to be a case which can be determined or gone into in an application under Section - 528 B.N.S.S. The application under Section - 528 B.N.S.S. lacks merit and thus, liable to be dismissed. 10. The application under Section - 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 4.4.2025 S Rawat Digitally signed by :- SHOBHIT RAWAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad