HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 48825 of 2025 Court No. - 81 HON'BLE MADAN PAL SINGH, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant, and the learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant for quashing of the impugned charge-sheet dated 10th May, 2025, cognizance/summoning order dated 8th August, 2025 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 102 of 2025 (State of U.P. Vs. Asheesh Kumar & Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 11 of 2025, under Sections 115 (2), 352, 117 (2) B.N.S., Police Station-Pachhongaon, District-Etawah, pending int he Court of Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Court No.4, Etawah. 3. Brief facts of the case is that the First Information Report dated 29th March, 2025 has been lodged by O.P, no.2/complainant against the three named accused persons including the applicant by alleging therein that on 12.03.2025 at about 7:30 PM, while the husband of the informant was sitting inside their house with the family, the co-accused Ashish (applicant herein), who is nephew-in-law of the informant, called her husband outside the house under the pretext of discussing some matter. Upon her husband stepping out, the applicant started hurling verbal abuses at him. When her husband objected to the abusive language, applicant along with co-accused Grish and Sanjay assaulted her husband, causing injuries to his hand. The informant accordingly made the application requesting legal action against the accused persons. 4. After lodging of the aforesaid first information report, the investigation proceeded and upon completion of the same, the Investigating Officer has submitted the charge-sheet against the applicant on which the cognizance has been taken and the applicant has been summoned, hence the present Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arvind Kumar Yadav, Parmeshwar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Asheesh Kumar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) application has been filed. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the First Information Report has been lodged on the basis of false and frivolous allegations, which is nothing but an abuse of process of law only with a view to harass the applicant. 6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has contented that from the allegations made in the First Information Report cognizable offence is made out against the applicants. The defence of the applicant cannot be taken into consideration, at this stage. Therefore, the applicant does not deserve any indulgence. 7. From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C./528 B.N.S.S. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen where the allegation made in the FIR/complaint, even of they are taken at their entirety, prima facie constitutes cognizable offence against the accused. 8. Position of law for invoking the jurisdiction of inherent power of High Court has been settled by the Apex Court in following judgments:- 1. R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866; 2. Kurukshetra University Vs. State of Haryana, (1977) 4 SCC 451; 3. State of West Bengal Vs. Swapan Kumar Guha, (1982) 1 SCC 561; 4. Dhanalakshmi Vs. R. Prasanna Kumar, 1990 Supp SCC 686; 5. State of Haryana & Others Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335; 6. State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 222; 7. B.S. Joshi Vs, State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675; 8. Sanapareddy Maheedhar Seshagiri & another Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh & another, (2007) 13 SCC 165; 9. State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullaha Jilani & others, (2017) 2 SCC 779; 10. M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra & others, 2021 AIR SC 1918. 9. After considering the totality of facts of the case and keeping in mind the NA528 No. 48825 of 2025 2 position of law, there is no merit in the present application. Apart from that there is no material to show that the complaint/FIR is malafide, frivolous and vexatious. The version of the first information report and the statements of the informant/complainant and injured recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C./180 B.N.S.S., the medical examination report of the injured and the police documents papers support the prosecution version. The interference at the threshold of quashing of the criminal proceedings of the present case cannot be said to be exceptional as it discloses prima facie commission of cognizable offence. 10.In the result, the prayer for quashing of entire proceeding, charge sheet and cognizance order is refused. 11. With the aforesaid observations, the application is dismissed. September 18, 2026 Sushil/- NA528 No. 48825 of 2025 3 (Madan Pal Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad