HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 30318 of 2025 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJ BEER SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA for State. 2. This application under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as BNSS) has been filed for quashing of entire proceedings, including charge-sheet dated 22.02.2016 as well as cognizance/ summoning order dated 12.04.2017, of Criminal Case No.460 of 2017 (State Vs. Rajesh Kumar), arising out of Case Crime No.296 of 2015, under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S.- Karchhana, District- Prayagraj, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Room No.08, Allahabad. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for applicant that applicant is innocent and no prima facie case is made out against him. In fact on 24.06.2015 the opposite party no.2 and others have assaulted the applicant and in that connection applicant has lodged a complaint and in that complaint the opposite party no.2 has been summoned. It was stated that applicant has filed a revision against summoning order but the informant has never disclosed that he has lodged first information report against applicant regarding same incident. The opposite party no.2 also filed an appeal before this court for quashing of proceedings of said complaint but in that proceedings also the opposite party no.2 did not disclose the fact that he has lodged a first information report against applicant. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that no prima facie case is made out and impugned proceedings are counterblast and thus liable to be quashed. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that in view of allegations made in the first information report and material collected during Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sandeep Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rajesh Kumar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) investigation, a prima facie case is made out against the applicant. 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, the 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 opposite party no.2/ informant has lodged the first information report of this case alleging that on 24.06.2015, the applicant has abused and assaulted him and resultantly he has sustained injuries. The first information report was lodged by the opposite party no.2 on the same day. After that on 07.07.2025 the applicant has moved an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., which was registered as a complaint case. Thus, it is apparent that the impugned proceedings cannot be termed as counterblast to the complaint lodged by the applicant. Further, the version of informant is supported by statements of witnesses. The medical examination report of informant has not been brought on record. 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 NA528 No. 30318 of 2025 2 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, it cannot be said no prima facie case is made out against applicant. 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 23, 2025 CS/- NA528 No. 30318 of 2025 3 (Raj Beer Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- CHANDAN SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad