Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:86210 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 17814 of 2025 Applicant :- Jay Prakash @ J.P. Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Abhay Pratap Singh,Sachin Singh 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 quash the summoning order dated 09.09.2022 and impugned charge sheet along with entire proceeding in Case Crime no. 54 of 2022 (State vs. Chandra Pal and others) registered under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, IPC and 4, 10 of U.P.Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, PS- Shikohabad, District Firozabad. 3. Brief facts of the case is that FIR was lodged by respondent no. 3/Sub-Inspector, PS- Shikohabad, District Firozabad against 14 persons including the applicant alleging therein that while informant was present at an examination centre of TET Examination on dated 23.01.2022, he received information that certain persons are standing at Etah Chauraha and they are waiting for other partners to make another candidate sit in place of right candidate in TET examination. The concerned police authority arrested them and asked about their other companions. The arrested persons informed about applicant and other accused persons and the police arrested the applicant from a Bus stand. After conclusion of investigation, charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant and other accused persons whereupon cognizance has been taken up vide impugned order dated 09.09.2022. 4. It is contended by learned counsel for applicant that false allegation has been made against the applicant and no proof of commission of offence is available. No independent witness have been examined. Applicant has no concern with other co-accused persons. He has no concern with the solver-gang. The concerned police officials asked the applicant for illegal gratification and upon refusal, falsely roped him in present case along with other co-accused persons. The essential ingredients of sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Section 4 and 10 of U.P.Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act is not fulfilled hence the entire proceeding is liable to be quashed. 5. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through instant application and supported the proceeding initiated against applicant. 6. After hearing the rival submissions extended by learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, this Court is of the opinion that entire argument whatsoever has been raised by learned counsel for applicant is subject matter of corroborating evidence along with statements whatsoever has already been recorded and the same shall be tried and adjudicated by learned trial court only and cannot be conclusively determined in proceedings under Section 528 BNSS. 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 case is made out for interference by this Court. 7. In view of the foregoing, the application under Section 528 BNSS is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 20.5.2025 Shaswat Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad