HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 37273 of 2026 Court No. - 74 HON'BLE DEEPAK VERMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicants; learned A.G.A. for State and perused the record. 2. Present 528 B.N.S.S. application has been filed to quash the summoning order dated 06.06.2024 passed by the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasganj as well as the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 9760 of 2023 (Akash Vs. Yogendra and others) under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kasganj, District, Kasganj, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasganj. 3. Counsel for the applicant submitted that applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. Present complaint has been lodged in counter to the F.I.R. lodged by the applicants against the opposite party no.2. Prima facie, no offence is made out against the applicants.The summoning order passed by learned Magistrate, is without application of judicial mind and the same is liable to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State submitted that considering the material evidences and allegations against the applicants on record, as on date, as per prosecution case, the cognizable offence against the applicants is made out. Under the facts and circumstances of the present case as well as materials on record against the applicants, the criminal proceedings against the applicants cannot be said to be abuse of process of Court. There is no illegality in the impugned summoning order and instant application is liable to be dismissed. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sunil Kumar, Tushar Krishnani Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Yogendra @ Yogendra Varshney And 7 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the entire record, this Court is of the view that it is well settled that the appreciation of evidence is a function of the trial court. This Court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot assume such jurisdiction and put an end to the process of trial provided under the law. It is also settled by the Apex Court in catena of judgments that the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at pre-trial stage should not be used in a routine manner but it has to be used sprangly, only in such an appropriate case, where on the face of record, the criminal proceeding is clear abuse of the process of the Court. The disputed questions of facts and defence of the accused cannot be taken into consideration at this pre-trial stage. 6. On perusal of record, it is apparent that statement of prosecution/complainant witnesses are being recorded under Section 244 Cr.P.C. It is also well settled that at the stage of summoning the accused, the court concerned is not required to go into the merit and demerit of the case. Genuineness or otherwise of the allegation cannot be even determined at the stage of summoning the accused. There is no good ground to invoke inherent power under Section 528 BNSS by this Court at this stage. The relief as claimed by the applicant through this application is refused. 7. The defence version of the applicant has to be considered by the court concerned at the appropriate stage. The accused/applicant has statutory remedy of moving discharge application before the court concerned at the appropriate stage. 8. Considering the material on record, it is directed that, if objection/discharge application is filed on behalf of the applicants before the court concerned within two weeks, it is expected that the court concerned will consider and decide the same expeditiously within a period of six weeks, in accordance with law. 9. With the aforesaid observations/directions, this application under Section 528 BNSS stands disposed of. September 8, 2026 Meenu Singh NA528 No. 37273 of 2026 2 (Deepak Verma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MEENU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad