HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 30207 of 2025 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJ BEER SINGH, J. 1. Heard Sri Dheeraj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 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 01.04.1998 as well as cognizance / summoning order dated 29.01.2002, of Case No. 1139 of 2006 (State Vs. Bhola Shankar and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 544 of 1997, under Sections - 143, 384, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station - Cantt., District- Allahbad, pending before the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.6, Allahabad. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. As per prosecution version, the police have lodged first information report of this case against applicant and co-accused persons, alleging that they indulge in collection of 'Gunda Tax' from shopkeepers. There is absolutely no such material that any of the shopkeeper or any other public person has made any complaint against applicant. During investigation also no such public person has been examined. Referring to first information report and statements of witnesses, it was submitted that no prima facie case is made out against applicant. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dheeraj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Bhola Sonkar @ Jitendra Nath Sonkar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 4. It is further submitted that the said proceedings are pending since the year 2002 and applicant is on bail and he is continuously appearing before the Trial court since last about 22-23 years but the case is still at the stage of summoning and even the charges have not been framed so far. It was also pointed out that in respect of similarly placed co-accused Anoop Kumar, this Court has already quashed the proceedings of aforesaid case, vide order dated 15.09.2003, passed in Criminal Misc. Application No. 2184 of 2002. It was stated that right of speedy trial of accused is an integral and essential part of fundamental right to life and that on ground of delay in trial also the impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed. 5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application but the aforesaid factual position could not be disputed. 6. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record. 7. 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. 8. In the instant matter perusal of record shows that the Sub-Inspector has lodged first information report of this case, alleging that he was told by certain shopkeepers that applicant and co-accused, namely, Bheem NA528 No. 30207 of 2025 2 Yadav, Pramod Kumar, Rajesh, Anoop Kumar, Vinod Kumar @ Jinna, Lal Ji and Rajesh @ Raju indulge in collection of money (Gunda Tax) from the shopkeepers. No shopkeeper has made any complaint in that regard. It was shown that even during investigation no shopkeeper has been examined as witness. The prosecution case is based on the basis of statement of police officials. In view of these facts and circumstances, the first information report and material on record does not disclose commission of any cognizable offence. Further in respect of similarly placed co-accused Anoop Kumar, the proceedings of impugned case have already been quashed by this Court. It would be pertinent to mention that right of speedy trial of accused is an integral and essential part of fundamental right to life. In the instant matter the incident relates to the year, 1997 and applicant is facing proceedings since the year 2002 and trial is yet to commence as even charges have not been framed so far. On this account also the impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed. 9. In view of aforesaid facts of the matter, a case for quashing of impugned proceedings is made out. Hence, the impugned proceedings, including charge-sheet and cognizance / summoning order of the aforesaid case, qua the applicant, are hereby quashed. 10. The application under Section - 528 BNSS is allowed in above terms. September 23, 2025 S Rawat NA528 No. 30207 of 2025 3 (Raj Beer Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHOBHIT RAWAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad