HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 28935 of 2025 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJ BEER SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants 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 02.02.2025 as well as cognizance / summoning order dated 02.07.2025, of Case No. 22636 of 2025 (State Vs. Jai Prakash and others), arising out of Case Crime No.68 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 117, 352, 351(2) BNS, P.S.- South, District- Firozabad, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and no prima-facie case is made out against them. Applicants as well as opposite party no.2 are real brothers and there was property related dispute between them. In the alleged incident, both the sides have sustained injuries. A case was also registered by applicant no.1 Jai Prakash against opposite party no.2 and others for offence under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 352, 351(2) BNS regarding same incident. Several persons from the side of applicants have sustained injuries in the incident. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that no prima-facie case is made out against them and impugned proceedings are malicious and thus liable to be quashed. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the application and submitted that in view of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vinay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Jai Prakash And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 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. 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 it appears from record that in the alleged incident both the parties have sustained injuries. The opposite party no.2 has lodged first information report on 21.01.2025 at 00:15 hours against applicants. After that applicant no.1 has lodged first information report against opposite party no.2 and others on the same day at 18:25 hours as a cross case. Which of the parties was aggressor, that can only be decided by the trial Court on the basis of evidence. In view of material collected during investigation, it NA528 No. 28935 of 2025 2 can not be said that no prima-facie case is made out against applicants. 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 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 8, 2025 'SP'/- NA528 No. 28935 of 2025 3 (Raj Beer Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad