Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:919 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26317 of 2024 Applicant :- Hafijullah Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Farhan Khan,Matiur Rehman Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings, including summoning order dated 10.05.2024, of Complaint Case No. 7021 of 2022 (Shahid Ansari Vs. Jabbar Sheikh and others), under Sections 323, 504, 506, 406 I.P.C., Police Station Tarkulwa, District Deoria, pending in the court of A.C.J.M., Court No.19, Deoria. 3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that no prima facie case is made out against the applicant. No amount was transferred by the complainant to the applicant. It was pointed out that in investigation under Section 202(1) Cr.P.C., no involvement of applicant has been found but despite that applicant has been summoned. Referring to the facts of the matter, it was submitted that no prima facie case is made out against the applicant. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that in the complaint and in the statement recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C., the opposite party no.2/ complainant has made clear allegations that the applicant and co-accused have taken Rs.6, 00,000/- from him on pretext of providing a job to his brother but no job was provided and his amount of Rs.3,80,000/- was not returned back. 5. I have considered 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 judgment 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. Perusal of record shows that the opposite party no.2/ complainant has made allegations in the complaint that the applicant and co-accused Abdul Qayyum Shah and Jabbar Sheikh have assured that they would provide job of clerk to his brother in Madarsa provided he pays Rs.8,00,000/- to them. On that pretext, complainant has given Rs.6,00,000/- to them and out of that amount Rs.1,00,000/- was transferred to the account of applicant accused. No job was provided to the brother of the complainant. It was alleged in the complaint that applicant has returned Rs. 1,00,000/- to the complainant but out of the total amount of Rs.6,00,000/-, the accused persons have not returned Rs.3,80,000/-. The submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant call for determination on questions of fact which may be adequately adjudicated upon only by the trial Court and even the submissions made on points of law can also be more appropriately gone into only 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 482 Cr.P.C. 8. After considering arguments raised by learned counsel for parties and perusing the impugned complaint and the materials in support of the same, this Court does not find it to be a case which can be determined or gone into in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Accordingly the prayer for quashing the impugned complaint and summoning order is hereby refused. 9. However, it is directed that in case applicant moves an application for discharge within a period of three weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. For a period of three weeks from today and in case, such an application is moved within the aforesaid period, till the disposal of such application, no coercive action shall be taken against applicant, provided applicant co-operates in early disposal of the discharge application. 10. The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of in above terms. Order Date :- 3.1.2025 RKM Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad