HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 29210 of 2025 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJ BEER SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as 'BNSS') has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings, including charge-sheet dated 07.10.2020 and cognizance / summoning order dated 18.01.2021, of criminal case no. 1033 of 2021, arising out of case crime no. 109 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504 IPC, P.S. Harduaganj, District Aligarh, pending in the court of A.C.J.M.-III, Aligarh. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and no prima facie case is made out against them. Regarding an incident dated 27.05.2020 applicant No. 9 Anil has lodged a first information report on 28.05.2020 against 41 persons, including applicants for offence under Sections 147, 148, 188, 323, 354-Kha, 336, 506 IPC, Section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act and Section 3 of Epidemic Act. After that the opposite party No. 2 / informant has lodged the first information report of this case on 30.05.2020 as a counterblast. The injured persons have not sustained any serious injury and merely some superficial and minor injuries have been shown. Learned counsel has referred the contents of first information report and statements of witnesses and submitted that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants. Referring to the facts of the matter, it was submitted that the impugned proceedings are counterblast and malicious and thus, liable to be quashed. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Gauri Shanker Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mahipal Singh And 12 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and argued that in view of the allegations made in the first information report and the material collected during investigation, a prima facie case is made out against the 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 regarding an incident of assault dated 27.05.2020 both the parties have lodged cases against each other. Applicant No. 9 has lodged the first information report on 28.05.2020 against as many as 41 named persons. The informant has lodged the first information report regarding the same incident on 30.05.2020 against 35 named persons, including the applicants. Both sides have sustained injuries. Which of the party is aggressor can only be decided by the trial court during evidence. The submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicants call for determination on questions of NA528 No. 29210 of 2025 2 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. In the instant matter, in view of the allegations made in the first information report and the material collected during investigation, no case for quashing of impugned proceedings is made out. Accordingly, the prayer as made above is hereby refused. 8. However, it is directed that in case applicants move an application for discharge before the trial court concerned within a period of two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. For a period of two weeks from today and in case such an application is moved within the aforesaid period, till the disposal of such application, no coercive action shall be taken against applicants, provided applicants co-operate in early disposal of the discharge application. 9. The application under Section 528 BNSS is disposed of in above terms. September 9, 2025 Anand NA528 No. 29210 of 2025 3 (Raj Beer Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANAND VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad