HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 19913 of 2025 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJ BEER SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. This application under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as BNSS) has been filed for quashing of entire proceedings, including cognizance order dated 11.07.2024, of Criminal Case No. 431 of 2024 (State Vs. Vishmo Haldar), arising out of Case Crime No. 446 of 2023, under Sections - 452, 354B, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station - Newriya, District - Pilibhit, pending before the Court of Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) / Judicial Magistrate-4, Pilibhit. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for applicant that applicant is innocent and no prima facie case is made out against him. Learned counsel has referred first information report and statement of informant / victim recorded under Section - 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and submitted that there are material contradictions in her statement. There is property related dispute between the parties and in that regard a second appeal is pending before this Court. The allegation that applicant has trespassed into the house of victim or outraged her modesty, are wholly false and that no prima facie case under Section - 452, 354-B I.P.C. is made out. In fact the first information report has been lodged with malafide motive to grab the property of applicant. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that no prima facie case is made out against applicant. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that in view of allegations made in first information report and material on record, a prima facie case is made out against applicant. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akhilesh Kumar Singh, Gyanendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Vishmo Haldhar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 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. 7. In the instant case the perusal of record shows that the informant / victim has made allegation in the first information report that applicant-accused often used to misbehave with her and that on 10.12.2023 applicant trespassed into her house and over powered her and threatened to kill her daughter. She has further alleged that applicant has pressed her chest and removed her 'saree'. Substantially the informant has supported said version in her statement recorded under Section - 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.. In view of material on record, it could 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. September 1, 2025 S Rawat NA528 No. 19913 of 2025 2 (Raj Beer Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHOBHIT RAWAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad