Dinesh Kumar Agrawal and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:53648

Court No. - 71

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 12061 of 2025 Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Agrawal And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prem Chandra Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

This application under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as BNSS) has been filed for quashing of entire proceedings, including summoning order dated 06.06.2023, of Complaint Case No.2597 of 2022 (Bhuri Singh Vs. Dinesh Kumar Agrawal and Others), under Section 406 I.P.C., Police Station- Etmaddaula, District- Agra, pending before the Court of Additional Civil Judge, Awar Khand, Court No.4, Agra.

¶7

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the impugned complaint has been lodged by the opposite party no.2, making false allegations and that no prima-facie case is made out against the applicants. It was submitted that as per statement of complainant, the talk regarding sale of potato crop of complainant has taken place between complainant and cashier of company of applicants. No specific allegation has been made against applicants. It is further submitted that the Company, namely, Shanti Vritt and Sons Private Ltd. has not been made accused in the impugned complaint. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that no prima-facie case is made out against the applicants and thus impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that in view of allegations made in the complaint and statement of complainant recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and of witnesses recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C., a primafacie case is made out against the applicants.

¶9

5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

¶10

The legal position on the issue of quashing of criminal proceedings is wellsettled 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 , Hon'ble 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.

¶11

In the instant matter the opposite party no.2 has lodged the impugned complaint, alleging that he has kept 400 packets of potato in the cold-storage of applicants. On 29.10.2021 he has contacted the applicants to sell his potato crop and they have agreed to purchase the same at the prevailing rate of Rs.850/- per packet and they agreed to pay total sum of Rs.3,40,000/- to him. It was further alleged that when complainant went to take his amount, he was not given any amount and his potato crop was misappropriated. The complainant has supported the said version in his statement recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and witnesses examined under Section 202 Cr.P.C. have also supported that version. The applicants are Directors of the Company, which owns the said cold-storage. 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.

¶12

After considering arguments raised by learned counsel for the parties and

¶13

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 528 BNSS. Accordingly, the prayer as made above is hereby refused.

¶14

However, it is directed that in case applicants move an application for discharge before the trial court concerned within a period of three weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law by the court concerned. It is further directed that for a period of three weeks from today and in case such an application for discharge is filed within the aforesaid period, till the disposal of discharge application, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants, provided the applicants cooperate in early disposal of discharge application.

¶15

The application under Section 528 BNSS is disposed of in above terms. Order Date :- 11.4.2025

¶16

'SP'/-

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dinesh Kumar Agrawal and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Kumar Agrawal and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases