Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 14962 of 2025 Applicant :- Rauaf And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rupesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J. 1.At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicants prays that he may be permitted to delete the name of applicant no.3 from array of parties. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to delete the name of applicant no.3 from the array of parties during the course of the day. 3. Heard Sri Rupesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 4. The present application has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 26.01.2017 as well as summoning/ cognizance order dated 14.02.2017 including the entire proceedings of Special Trial No.44 of 2017, arising out of Case Crime No.1045 of 2016, under Section 376, 493, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Dhaghata, District Sant Kabir, pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C.-II, Sant Kabir Nagar. 5. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that after submission of charge sheet in the FIR lodged by the opposite party no.2, the trial was started in the year 2017 and during trial, statements of opposite party no.2 as well as her mother and father were recorded. In their statements, they have not made allegation against the applicant no.1 and 2. Therefore proceeding of aforesaid sessions trial be quashed. 6. Learned AGA for the State in support of his submission, relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Narinder Singh and ors vs State of Punjab and another passed in Criminal Appeal No. 686 of 2014, wherein the Apex Court has observed that in serious offence against the society, High Court should not decide in cursory manner merely on the basis of statement of parties. 7. However, from perusal of record, it appears that trial of the main accused Dilshad Ahmad has been separated from the applicants for the reason, he is out of country. It is clear that till date all the prosecution witnesses have not been examined. From perusal of the statement of PW 1, 3 and 4, it is clear that there is no specific allegation against the applicant nos.1 and 2 but without examining all the witnesses, it would not appropriate to quash the entire proceeding of the aforesaid case. Therefore, prayer for quashing the proceeding of sessions trial is refused. 8. However, from perusal of record, it appears that evidence against the applicant nos.1 and 2 are very week, therefore, the court below is directed to expedite the trial of the aforesaid case and conclude the same, as early as possible. 9. With the aforesaid observation, the present application is disposed of. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 A.Kr. Digitally signed by :- AJAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad