HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 25322 of 2025 Court No. - 92 HON'BLE KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-opposite party No. 1. 2. The instant application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the applicants for quashing the cognizance/ summoning order dated 26.03.2025 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 159 of 2025 (State vs. Bajrang alias B.K. alias Sumit Kumar and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 96 of 2024, under Sections 323, 325, 506, 504 and 308 IPC, Police Station Charwa, District Kaushambi pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)-II, Kaushambi. 3. Submission is that main allegations were levelled against other persons including Raju Pasi, however his name was expunged during the course of investigation, but has been illegally incorporated in the summoning order. It is also urged that the entire record does not give rise to any offence punishable under Section 308 IPC and injury No. 1 being simple in nature, mere fact is that injury No. 2 was reported to be grievous in nature, the same relates to elbow joint, no offence under Section 308 IPC stands made out. It is also urged that applicant No. 2 being servant of Raju Pasi, has been falsely implicated in the matter. It is also urged that in the present matter twice charge sheets were submitted and once the officers found that earlier investigation suffered from infirmities, inasmuch as, even video clip of the incident was not collected, submission of second charge sheet is also hit. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amarnath Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Bajrang alias B.K. alias Sumit Kumar and another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and another .....Opposite Party(s) 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer and it is urged that serious allegations of physical assault were levelled against all the accused persons and mere fact that one or other injury has been described as simple/grievous, the same, in itself, is not sufficient to either stay the proceedings or quash the charge sheet. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, the Court finds that arguments based upon Raju Pasi have no relevance in the present case as he is not the applicant and, therefore, whether his name was wrongly incorporated in the summoning order is irrelevant. 6. A bare perusal of the record further indicates that having found the investigation irregular to some extent, the officials had directed for removal of the shortcomings and thereafter, investigation proceeded further and once subsequently material has been collected so as to submit charge sheet, earlier irregularity, prima facie stands washed away and, therefore, even this argument cannot be sustained at this stage. 7. The allegations against the applicants are that on the date of occurrence, all the accused persons had joined together and caused physical assault on the injured and, therefore, merely because gravity of one or the other offence may be weak, the same shall be taken care of by the trial court during the course of trial or any court hearing bail application. 8. In view of settled position of law that trial cannot be judged at pre-trial stage and unless there are strong grounds for interference in the proceedings or cognizance is hit by any statutory mandate, inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C./528 BNSS cannot be exercised. 9. In view of above, there is no merit in the present application. The same is, accordingly, rejected, leaving it open for the applicants to invoke other remedies provided under the law. September 16, 2025 Sazia NA528 No. 25322 of 2025 2 (Kshitij Shailendra, J.) Digitally signed by :- SAZIA AQUIL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad