HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 22029 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE DEEPAK VERMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present 528 BNSS application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 25.12.2017, cognizance order dated 27.03.2018 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No. 1252 of 2018 (State Vs. Surjan Singh and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 0362 of 2017, under Sections 147, 148, 336, 341, 332, 353, 352, 427 I.P.C., P.S. Sirsaganj, District Firozabad, pending in the court of A.C.J.M.-II, Shikohabad, Firozabad. 3. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that 17 named and 100-150 unknown persons sit on road on account of incident occurred on NH-2 and when police tried to clear the traffic, they attacked on police personnel by Lathi, Danda and threw stones as well as the police vehicles got damaged. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants are named in the F.I.R. but during recording statement of witnesses, no one has named the applicants. Prima facie no offence is made out against the applicants and the charge-sheet has been submitted the Investigating Officer without collecting material evidence and the applicants have no knowledge with regard to summoning by the Magistrate. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that summoning process have been issued on the printed proforma and in view of the judgment passed by this Court as well as Apex Court, the same is liable to be quashed. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants and submitted that after submission of charge-sheet, Court taken cognizance and issued summons against the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Alok Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Jabar Singh And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) applicants on 27.03.2018 and more than 6 years have passed but applicants did not appear before the Court. The statements of witnesses are disputed questions of fact which cannot be considered at this stage. 6. The grounds taken in the application reveal that many of them relate to disputed question of fact. This Court is of the view that it is well settled that the appreciation of evidence is a function of the trial court. This Court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot assume such jurisdiction and put an end to the process of trial provided under the law. It is also settled by the Apex Court in catena of judgments that The impugned criminal proceeding against the applicants is abuse of the process of the Court and is liable to be quashed by this Court.the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at pre-trial stage should not be used in a routine manner but it has to be used sparingly, only in such an appropriate cases, where it manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the institution or continuance of the criminal proceedings or where allegations made in First Information Report or charge-sheet and the materials relied in support of same, on taking their face value and accepting in their entirety do not disclose the commission of any offence against the accused. The disputed questions of facts and defence of the accused cannot be taken into consideration at this pre-trial stage. 7. In view of the above, in the light of judgment of the Apex Court in the matters of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, Manik B. Vs. Kadapala Sreyes Reddy and another, 2023 Live Law (SC) 642, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283, no ground for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case, is made out which may call for any interference by this Court in exercise of its inherent power under Section 528 B.N.S.S as the same do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity. 8. Considered the argument of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. From the record, it is apparent that applicants are named in the F.I.R. and charge-sheet has been submitted and more than 6 years have passed and the applicants avoided the summons and non-bailable warrants were issued against the applicants. Perusal of the cognizance as well as summoning order of the Court, it is clear that Court has applied its judicial mind and after perusing the evidence had issued the summons. No NA528 No. 22029 of 2025 2 interference is warranted herein. The present application under 528 BNSS is dismissed, accordingly. September 24, 2025 Kpy NA528 No. 22029 of 2025 3 (Deepak Verma,J.) Digitally signed by :- KAVLESHWAR PRASAD YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad