Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:122579 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 23091 of 2025 Applicant :- Badar Ali And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Bhavya Sahai 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 for quashing of the entire proceedings, including charge-sheet dated 06.06.2023 as well as cognizance / summoning order dated 08.09.2023, of Case No. 22372 of 2023 (State Vs. Badar Ali and others), arising out of Case Crime No.0025 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S.- Delhigate, District- Meerut, pending in the court of Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that allegations made against applicants, are wholly false and no prima-facie case is made out against them. In fact, only a trivial dispute has taken place between informant and applicant no.1 and that applicant nos.2, 3 & 4 were not present at the spot. After incident, the informant has himself made an application to the police stating that he does not want his medical examination and he has not sustained any injury and that incident has taken place only due to minor quarrel. It was stated that alleged medical examination of informant has been conducted after three days and the injuries shown therein are wholly false. Learned counsel has referred first information report and material on record and submitted that no prima-facie case is made out against applicants and the impugned proceedings are liable the quashed. 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 perusal of record shows that the informant has made allegation in the first information report that applicants and co-accused persons have abused and threatened him and with intention to kill him, they have assaulted the informant with lathi and sticks and resultantly, he has sustained injuries and that his medical examination was not got conducted. The informant has supported that version in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Merely, because the first information report has been lodged after three days or there is delay of three days in medical examination of informant, impugned proceedings are not liable to be quashed. 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 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 :- 25.7.2025 'SP'/- Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad