Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:49121 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 10716 of 2025 Applicant :- Ravi Kumar Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vinit Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Vinit Mishra, learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA for the State. 2. Present application has been preferred with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Case no. 97/2018 (State vs. Ravi Yadav and another) (CNR no. UPKJ120006722018), Case Crime no. 275/2013, under Section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955, PS- Saurikh, District Kannauj, as well as charge sheet dated 02.08.2013 and summoning order dated 31.03.2018 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Chhibramau, District Kannauj, so far as it relates to applicant. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submitted that applicant was private helper in Bharat Gas Balaji Gas Agency, Etawah Road, Bidhuna, Auraiya. On dated 22.07.2013, Ravi Yadav (hawker of Bharat Gas Balaji Gas Agency) along with the applicant was going to deliver 37 LPG gas cylinders to the consumers which were loaded on vehicle UP74-D9094 owned by Ravi Yadav and he himself was driving the vehicle. On dated 22.07.2013 during vehicle checking, concerned S.H.O of PS- Saurikh, Kannauj stopped the vehicle and 37 LPG gas cylinders were seized by them. Thereafter, concerned Food Officer, District Supply Office, Kannauj lodged the FIR dated 22.07.2013 at Case Crime no. 275/2013, under Section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955, PS- Saurikh, District Kannauj with the allegation that aforesaid cylinder were being black marketed. 4. Investigating Officer filed charge sheet on dated 02.08.2013 against the applicant and hawker Ravi Yadav under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Thereafter, District Magistrate, Kannauj passed order dated 29.08.2013 granting permission for purpose of Section 11 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955. After 4 years and 8 months, learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Chhibramau, District Kannauj took cognizance and summoned the applicant vide impugned order dated 31.03.2018. 5. It is contended by learned counsel for applicant that in view of receipts of LPG gas cylinders dated 22.07.2013 as annexed along with this application, no case of black-marketing is made out against the applicant under Section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act. There is no evidence against the applicant to hold him liable under Section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act. The impugned cognizance order has been passed without application of judicial mind and is unreasoned order hence liable to be quashed. 6. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant application. 7. After hearing the rival submissions extended by learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, this Court is of the opinion that at the stage of summoning, the Magistrate is only required to record a prima facie opinion, based on the material on record, and is not expected to hold a mini trial or to examine the defence of the accused. In judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in case of S.W. Palanitkar and Others v. State of Bihar and Another; (2002) 1 SCC 241 it was held that the test which was required to be applied was whether there is "sufficient ground for proceeding" and not whether there is "sufficient ground for conviction". In the case of Nupur Talwar v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another; (2012) 11 SCC 465, it was reiterated that the limited purpose of consideration of material at the stage of issuing process being tentative as distinguished from the actual evidence produced during trial, the test to be applied at the stage was whether the material placed before the Magistrate was "sufficient for proceeding against the accused" and not "sufficient to prove and establish the guilt". 8. Upon perusal of the records, it is observed that prima facie offence is made out against the applicant. The assertions of false implication raised by the applicant are factual issues that requires proper adjudication by the trial court based on evidence and cannot be conclusively determined in proceedings under Section 528 BNSS. 9. It is well settled that the inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS are to be exercised sparingly and with caution, primarily to prevent abuse of the process of the court or to secure the ends of justice. In the instant case, no sufficient ground have been made out to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 BNSS. 10. In view of the foregoing, the application under Section 528 BNSS is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 4.4.2025 Shaswat Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad