Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:105729 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 16691 of 2025 Applicant :- Rajendra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant 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 20.09.2023 as well as cognizance / summoning order dated 31.01.2025, of Case No. 1952 of 2025 (State Vs. Rajendra Singh), arising out of Case Crime No.515 of 2023, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S.- Civil Lines, District- Moradabad, pending in the court of C.J.M., Moradabad. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Applicant was working as Honorary Company Commander in Moradabad. The allegation that in muster roll applicant has falsely mentioned 1288 working days in place of 1237 working days, is wholly false. In fact, the muster roll was prepared by one Shiv Kumar and he has not been made accused. Applicant has already been granted anticipatory bail. It is further submitted that after this case, one more first information report was lodged against applicant under Section 170 IPC and Section 67 I.T. act and in that case this Court has already granted interim protection. There is no evidence that applicant has committed any forgery. Further, no amount was withdrawn against the alleged 1288 working days and only attempt of the same was shown. Learned counsel has referred first information report and material collected during investigation and submitted that no prima-facie case is made out against applicant. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the application and submitted that in view of first information report and material collected during investigation, a prima-facie case is made out against applicant. 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 applicant was working as Honorary Company Commander in Company 13, Nagar Moradabad and there is allegation that he has committed forgery in muster roll and converted the figure of 1237 working days into 1288 working days in order to withdraw an additional amount of Rs.15,300/- from public exchequer. The first information report has been lodged by the Company Commander after inquiry into the matter. In view of allegations made in the first information report and material collected during investigation, it can not be said that no prima-facie case is made out against applicant. The submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant 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 :- 7.7.2025 'SP'/- Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad