HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 35524 of 2025 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. This application has been filed by the applicant to quash the entire proceeding of Case no. 1957 of 2020 (State vs. Deepak Kumar Yadav) pending before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai arising out of Case Crime no. 62 of 2019 under Section 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act, PS- Churkhi, District Jalaun, including the summoning order dated 03.09.2020. 3. While assailing entire proceeding in shape of cognizance order, it is contended by learned counsel for applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. During inspection of Fair Price Shop, it was claimed that 20 bags of wheat and 1 bag of rice were found in stock, which is completely false. At the time of inspection, actual stock was 6.97 quintals of wheat and 4.64 quintals of rice, which the Supply Inspector did not verify. If videography had been done, it would have been clear how much stock was actually present. This shows the allegations levelled against the applicant is false, hence the entire proceeding is liable to be set aside. 4. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through instant application. 5. After hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, it is observed that prima facie it cannot be Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ram Krishna Yadav, Subhash Chandra Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Deepak Kumar Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) said that no offence is made out against the applicant. The assertions of false implication raised by the applicant are factual issues that requires proper adjudication by the trial court based on evidence and cannot be conclusively determined in proceedings under Section 528 BNSS. In proceeding u/s 528 BNSS, this Court is not inclined to hold mini-trial. 6. It is well settled that the inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS are to be exercised sparingly and with caution, primarily to prevent abuse of the process of the court or to secure the ends of justice. In the instant case, no sufficient ground have been made out to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 BNSS. 7. In view of the foregoing, the application under Section 528 BNSS is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. However, if the applicant intends to prefer bail application before learned court concerned, he may prefer the same within a period of three weeks from today. If he prefers the same, within a period of three weeks, the same shall be considered by learned concerned court in the light of judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2021) 10 SCC 773. Till three weeks from today, no coercive action shall be initiated against the applicant. September 23, 2025 Shaswat NA528 No. 35524 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad