Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:83612 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 16456 of 2025 Applicant :- Umang Taneja Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Prakash Narayan Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Present application has been preferred with prayer to set aside the charge sheet dated 28.05.2023 as well as summoning order dated 25.08.2023 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no. 3, Ghaziabad and also entire criminal proceeding of Case no. 6027 of 2023 (State vs. Umang Taneja) in Case Crime no. 35 of 2023, under Section 67 I.T. Act, PS- Nandgram, District Ghaziabad, pending in court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no. 3, Ghaziabad. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for applicant that opposite party no. 2/informant lodged FIR on dated 15.01.2023 against applicant under section 67 IT Act, alleging therein that applicant who is a Youtuber, posted a video wherein he made insulting remarks on informant and used obscene words against her. After conclusion of investigation, charge-sheet dated 28.05.2023 has been submitted against applicant whereupon learned court concerned took cognizance vide order dated 25.08.2023 which has been challenged through instant application. 4. It is contended by learned counsel for applicant that applicant did not committed such offence. Applicant is innocent and the allegations made against him is false. There is no evidence on record to disclose that the alleged offence is made out against applicant. Learned court below did not properly perused the facts and evidences and illegally summoned the applicant. 5. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant application. 6. After hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, including the FIR, statements of the complainant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., 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. Entire argument whatsoever has been raised by learned counsel for applicant is also subject matter of fine scrutiny of statements and evidences which has to be dealt by only learned trial court. 7. 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. 8. In view of the foregoing, the application under Section 528 BNSS is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. However, applicant is at liberty to avail whatever other remedies available at law. Order Date :- 17.5.2025 Shaswat Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad