HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 28013 of 2025 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJ BEER SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the 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 24.12.2020 as well as cognizance / summoning order dated 18.04.2023, of Case No. 5025 of 2023 (State Vs. Man Singh), arising out of Case Crime No.193 of 2020, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S.- Kothibhar, District- Maharajganj, pending in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.) / Judicial Magistrate, Jaji, Maharajganj. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation that applicant has obtained the job of Assistant Teacher on the basis of forged TET Certificate, is wholly false. In fact the applicant has passed the TET examination. The first information report has been lodged with false and baseless allegations. It is further submitted that by order dated 19.10.2020 passed in Writ- A No.8704 of 2020, applicant was permitted to serve at his post till next date of listing. It was submitted that till the said writ petition is decided, the proceedings of this case may be stayed by this Court. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the application and submitted that the first information report has been lodged after due inquiry and there are Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Kumar Upadhyay, Ambuj Pandey, Smita Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Man Singh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) allegations that applicant has obtained a job of Assistant Teacher on the basis of forged TET Certificate. 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 case the first information report has been lodged by the Block Education Officer on the direction of Basic Shiksha Adhikari. In the first information report entire details have been mentioned regarding appointment of applicant as Assistant Teacher and it was found that applicant has not passed TET examination and he has obtained the job of Assistant Teacher on the basis of forged TET Certificate. As clear allegations of cheating and forgery have been levelled against applicant, thus NA528 No. 28013 of 2025 2 the proceedings of the case can not be stayed merely on the ground that in writ petition, interim order was passed in favour of applicant and he was permitted to work till next date. In view of nature of allegations made in the first information report and material collected during investigation, it can not be said that no prima-facie case is made out against applicant. 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 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, no case for quashing of impugned proceedings is made out. 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 10, 2025 'SP'/- NA528 No. 28013 of 2025 3 (Raj Beer Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad