Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:107038 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 15745 of 2025 Applicant :- Husain Kuraishi And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Muhammad Azam 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. This application u/s 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as 'BNSS') has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings, including charge-sheet dated 26.12.2023 as well as cognizance / summoning order dated 17.03.2025, of Case No. 25 of 2025 (State Vs. Husain Kuraishi And Another), arising out of Case Crime No.206 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S.- Sonauli, District- Maharaj Ganj, pending in the court of Village Court, Nautanwan, Maharaj Ganj. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that opposite party no.2 is maternal uncle of applicants and there was property related dispute between them. The first information report has been lodged against applicants making false allegations and the injuries shown to the opposite party no.2 / informant, are false and fictitious. Only simple injuries have been shown to the opposite party no.2. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that no prima-facie case is made out against applicants. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the application and submitted that in view of allegations made in first information report, statement of informant and of witnesses, a prima-facie case is made out against 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 the opposite party no.2 has made clear allegations that on 20.12.2023 applicants have abused and assaulted him and also threatened to kill him. In medical examination report two injuries have been shown on person of opposite party no.2. The version of informant / injured is supported by several other witnesses examined during investigation. In view of first information report and material collected during investigation, it can not be said that no prima-facie case is made out against applicants. 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 first information report and materials on record, 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 :- 8.7.2025 'SP'/- Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad