Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:121534 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 24063 of 2025 Applicant :- Keshav Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Srivastava,Ranveer Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. This application u/s 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as 'BNSS') has been preferred against charge-sheet dated 24.06.2021 as well as cognizance / summoning order dated 08.09.2021, of Criminal Case No. 81 of 2021 (State Vs. Keshav Singh and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 0034 of 2021, under Sections - 406, 504 I.P.C., Police Station - Tanda, District - Rampur, pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Rampur. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for applicants that the first information report of this case has been lodged by the opposite party no.2 making false and baseless allegations. The allegation that applicants were agent of "Manav Sewa Evam Jankalyan Samiti" is wholly false. No investigation has been conducted as to who runs the alleged "Manav Sewa Evam Jankalyan Samiti". The allegations that applicants have taken total amount of Rs. 14,35,000/- from informant and other victims on pretext that after one year they would pay double amount and all the articles relating to marriage, are wholly false. There is absolutely no documentary evidence that any such amount was given by the informant or by any other victim to the applicants. The applicants have been charge-sheeted merely on the basis of oral allegations. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that no prima facie case is made out against applicants. 4. Learned A.G.A. 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. 7. In the instant matter the perusal of record shows that the informant has alleged that applicants have told that they are agent of "Manav Sewa Evam Jankalyan Samiti" and they promised that on the investment, after one year they would provide double amount and would also provide articles of marriage to the informant and other women victims. It appears that informant as well as several other women have deposited various amounts with the applicants and a total amount of Rs. 14,35,000/- was deposited with applicants. As per informant and other victims, no amount was returned back to them. It appears that besides the informant, several other victims have also made similar statements. Merely because there is no documentary proof that applicants were agent of the said Samiti or that any such amount was given to the applicants, 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 first information report and the materials in support of the same, no case for quashing of impugned proceedings is made out. Accordingly, the prayer as made above is hereby refused. 9. However, it is directed that in case applicants surrender before the court concerned within a period of three weeks from today and apply for bail, their bail application shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with settled law. For a period of three weeks from today or till the applicants surrender before the court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case. 10. The application under Section 528 BNSS is disposed of in above terms. Order Date :- 24.7.2025 S Rawat Digitally signed by :- SHOBHIT RAWAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad