Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:84476 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 14660 of 2025 Applicant :- Raj Kumar Sharma Alias Raj Kumar Bhardwaj And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajai Mani Tiwari 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 under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as BNSS) has been filed for quashing of entire proceedings, including summoning order dated 20.02.2025, of Complaint Case No. 36182 of 2025, under Sections - 323, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali Mathura, District - Mathura, pending before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.01, Mathura. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for applicants that impugned complaint has been lodged by the opposite party no.2 making false allegations. Applicant No.1 as well as opposite party no.2 / complainant are real brothers. Regarding an incident dated 15.12.2023 the applicant no.1 has lodged a first information report against opposite party no.2 and one Arjun for offence under Section - 452, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C.. After that the opposite party no.2 has lodged impugned complaint as a counter blast. Learned counsel has referred statement of complaint recorded under Section - 200 Cr.P.C. and statement of witnesses recorded under Section - 202 Cr.P.C. and submitted that there are contradictions in their statements. The injuries shown to the son of opposite party no.2 are false and nature of said injuries has not been mentioned. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that no prima facie case is made out against applicants and impugned proceedings are 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. 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. 7. In the instant matter, it appears from record that regarding an incident dated 15.12.2023 the applicant no.1 has lodged a first information report against opposite party no.2 and one Arjun and that on 02.01.2024 the opposite part no.2 has filed an application under Section - 156 (3) Cr.P.C., alleging that on 21.12.2023 he and his family members were assaulted by the applicants. In the injury report of son of opposite party no.2, seven injuries have been shown, which include incised wounds and contusions. The version of complainant is supported by his statement under Section - 200 Cr.P.C. The witnesses examined under Section - 202 Cr.P.C. have also supported the version of complainant. Since the injured has sustained several injuries and both the parties are members of one and same family, various questions of facts are involved and impugned proceedings cannot be quashed merely on the ground that earlier applicant no.1 has lodged a first information report against opposite party no.2. 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. 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 BNSS. 8. After considering arguments raised by learned counsel for the parties and perusing the impugned complaint and the materials in support of the same, no case for quashing of impugned proceedings is made out. The application under Section 528 BNSS lacks merits and thus, liable to be dismissed. 9. Accordingly, the application u/s 528 BNSS is dismissed. Order Date :- 20.5.2025 S Rawat Digitally signed by :- SHOBHIT RAWAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad