Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:786 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 44134 of 2024 Applicant :- Subham Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Byas Kumar Prasad,Pradeep Kumar Keshri,Shravan Kumar Panday Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent, and perused the record. 2. The instant application has been preferred with the prayer to quash the order dated 22.7.2024 as well as entire proceedings of Case No.1217 of 2024 titled State v. Subham, arising out of Case Crime No.222 of 2024, under sections 363, 366 IPC and 16/17 of POCSO Act, Police Station Atrauli, District Aligarh, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Additional District & Sessions Judge, Aligarh. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant married the victim on 15.4.2024, and, as a result, the provisions of Sections 16/17 of the POCSO Act are not applicable. After registration of the FIR, the victim was rescued and subsequently handed over to her parents. It is further argued that the victim married out of her own will, and the Investigating Officer has failed to gather any incriminating material during the investigation, therefore, the proceedings initiated against the applicant is vitiated under the law. 4. Learned A.G.A. opposes the submissions made by the applicant's counsel, stating that the victim was 16 years old at the time of marriage. Therefore, her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has no significance. 5. After hearing the arguments of both parties and examining the documents placed on record, the Court finds that there is prima facie evidence indicating that the applicant enticed the minor daughter of the complainant and married her. A plain reading of the FIR and the victim's statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. reveals that the applicant has committed a cognizable offense. The provisions of Sections 363 and 366 of the IPC, along with Sections 16/17 of the POCSO Act, are clearly applicable. Consequently, there is no basis for quashing the impugned proceedings. 6. So far as the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant calls for determination on questions of fact, which may be adequately adjudicated upon 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. In view of the material on record, it can also not be held that the impugned criminal proceedings are manifestly attended with mala fide and maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. Similarly, no such illegality, perversity or any other substantial error could be pointed out in the impugned summoning order so as to warrant any interference by this Court in the exercise of powers u/s 482 Cr.P.C. 7. The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merit, and it is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 2.1.2025 Anil K. Sharma Justice Vinod Diwakar Digitally signed by :- ANIL KUMAR SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad