Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:106509 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 15595 of 2025 Applicant :- Chandra Veer And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anita Singh,Kumari Poonam Rajpoot,Prem Babu Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred as 'BNSS') has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings, including cognizance / summoning order dated 10.12.2024, of criminal case no. 20 of 2025, arising out of case crime no. 195 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 352, 76, 351(3) BNS, P.S. Jalesar, District Etah, pending in the court of A.C.J.M., Jalesar, Etah. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and no prima facie case is made out against them. The first information report was lodged making false and baseless allegations. Learned counsel has referred statements of independent witnesses namely, Ashok Kumar and Ramesh and submitted that these witnesses have stated that incident between the parties has taken place at agricultural land, whereas the informant has made allegations in the first information report that applicants have trespassed into her house and assaulted her. Further, during investigation involvement of co-accused Satya Prakash and Gyanendra was found false and they have been exonerated. The injuries shown to the informant are wholly false and fictitious. It was further submitted that there are material contradictions and infirmities in the statements of witnesses and informant and thus, impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and argued that in view of the allegations made in the first information report and the material collected during investigation, 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. In this connection, a reference may also be made to the case of R. Kalyani vs. Janak C. Mehta and Others, 2009 (1) SCC 516, Rupan Deol Bajaj vs. K.P.S. Gill (1995) SCC (Cri) 1059, Rajesh Bajaj vs. State of NCT of Delhi, (1999) 3 SCC 259 and Medchl Chemicals & Pharma (P) Ltd vs. Biological E Ltd. & Ors, 2000 SCC (Cri) 615. It has been held that if a prima facie case is made out disclosing ingredients of the offence, court should not quash the charge sheet/complaint. It is equally well settled that at this stage questions of fact cannot be examined and a mini trial cannot be held. 7. In the instant matter perusal of record shows that in the first information report the informant has alleged that regarding an incident dated 19.06.2024, which took place at the agricultural land, she has lodged a non-cognizable report. Due to that enmity, on 02.07.2024 applicants have trespassed into her house and they have abused and assaulted her. In medical examination report of informant, as many as ten injuries have been shown on her person and she has been medically examined in government hospital. The informant has supported her version in her statements, recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS. Merely because some independent witnesses have stated that incident took place at the agricultural land or that involvement of two persons was found false, the impugned proceedings cannot be quashed. 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. In the instant matter, in view of the allegations made in the first information report and the material collected during investigation, no case for quashing of impugned proceedings is made out. Accordingly, the prayer as made above is hereby refused. 8. However, it is directed that in case applicants move an application for discharge before the trial court concerned within a period of three weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. For a period of three weeks from today and in case such an application is moved within the aforesaid period, till the disposal of such application, no coercive action shall be taken against applicants, provided applicants co-operate in early disposal of the discharge application. 9. The application under Section 528 BNSS is disposed of in above terms. Order Date :- 7.7.2025 Anand Digitally signed by :- ANAND VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad