Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:117851 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 17539 of 2025 Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Patel And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Singh,Jai Prakash Yadav 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 13.09.2023 as well as cognizance / summoning order dated 21.03.2024, of Case No. 5779 of 2024 (State Vs. Brijesh Kumar Patel and others), arising out of Case Crime No.452 of 2023, under Sections 323, 342 IPC, P.S.- Line Bazar, District- Jaunpur, pending in the court of C.J.M., Court No.11, Jaunpur. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and no prima-facie case is made out against them. There is property related dispute between the parties and the applicants have been falsely implicated due to that reason. The independent witnesses have denied the allegation that applicants have removed clothes of the victim. It was stated that as per statement of informant, police have rescued the informant and his wife from a room, whereas independent witnesses have stated that informant and his wife were taken out of room and after that police have reached the spot. The injuries shown to the injured, are simple in nature. 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 and materials on record, 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 informant has lodged first information report alleging that on 29.08.2023 while his wife has gone to bathroom, she was harassed by applicants-accused and thereafter informant and his wife were assaulted by them and they were confined in a room. Police was informed and they have rescued them. The prosecution version that informant and his wife were assaulted and confined by the applicants and co-accused persons in the room, is supported by several independent witnesses. The prosecution version is further supported by the injury report of the injured. In view of these facts and circumstances, no case for quashing of impugned proceedings is made out. 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. Hence, the prayer as sought above is hereby refused. 9. 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 by the court concerned. It is further directed that for a period of three weeks from today and in case such an application for discharge is filed within the aforesaid period, till the disposal of discharge application, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants, provided the applicants cooperate in early disposal of discharge application. 10. With the aforesaid observations, the application u/s 528 BNSS is disposed of. Order Date :- 21.7.2025 'SP'/- Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad