Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:43087 Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 98 of 2023 Applicant :- Nasim Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Affairs And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mahesh Kumar,Sudhakar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri Sudhakar Mishra, the learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Hans Raj Verma, the learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. Notice was issued to the opposite party No.2 by means of an order dated 09.01.2023 and the office has reported on 14.02.2023 that the notice stands served through an adult male member of family of the opposite party No.2 but no one has put in appearance on her behalf to oppose the application. Therefore, the Court proceeds to decide the application after hearing submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. 3. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants have sought quashing of the charge-sheet dated 10.12.2020 in Case Crime No.184/2020 under Sections 376/323/504/506 IPC relating to P.S.- Kheeron, District- Raebareli as well as the summoning order dated 12.02.2021 passed by the Civil Judge (J.D.)/FTC-II, Raebareli including the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.33168 of 2022 pending in the Court of 4th Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raebareli. 4. The aforesaid case has been instituted on the basis of an FIR lodged by the opposite party No.2 on 27.06.2020 against the applicant and his unnamed family members, stating that her husband is residing abroad for the past two years, the applicant is her husband's cousin and under allurement of marrying her, the applicant has been making physical relations with her for the past several years and thereafter, he declined to marry her. 5. In the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the informant stated that she was aged 23 years (at the time of making the statement), her husband resides abroad for the past two years, the applicant is her husband's cousin, he used to visit her place and a relationship developed between them and both of them made physical relations. Thereafter, the applicant kept on talking to her through phone for one year and to keep on alluring to marry her. 6. The medico-legal examination report of the opposite party No.2 did not reveal anything significant. 7. In the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the opposite party No.2 stated that the applicant is her husband's cousin, he used to visit her matrimonial home, they started talking to each other and made physical relations on several occasions. When they made physical relations for the first time, she was already married. She stated that the applicant had assured that that he would marry her after she gives divorce to her husband. She stated that after her husband divorced her, the applicant declined to marry her. 8. After investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted a charge-sheet dated 10.12.2020 for the offences under Sections 376/323/504/506 IPC. 9. The State has filed a counter affidavit to which the applicant has filed a rejoinder affidavit annexing therewith copies of affidavits given by some villagers to the Investigating Officer stating that the allegations levelled by the opposite party No.2 are false. 10. The opposite party No.2 has not come forward to oppose the application seeking quashing of the proceedings in spite of service of notice. 11. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that even as per the case set-up by the opposite party No.2, she was already married before inception of her relationship with the applicant, who is a cousin of her husband. She has stated that her husband was residing abroad and a relationship developed between her and the applicant. She has not stated that the relationship developed after the applicant had allured to marry her. There is no allegations of use of force by the applicant. 12. In these circumstances, I am of the view that even as per the prosecution case set-up by the opposite party No.2, commission of any offence by the applicant is not made out. 13. In these circumstances, the criminal proceedings instituted by the opposite party No.2 against the applicant deserves to be quashed. 14. Accordingly, the present application is allowed and the charge- sheet dated 10.12.2020 in Case Crime No.184/2020 under Sections 376/323/504/506 IPC relating to P.S.- Kheeron, District- Raebareli as well as the summoning order dated 12.02.2021 passed by the Civil Judge (J.D.)/FTC-II, Raebareli including the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.33168 of 2022 pending in the Court of 4th Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raebareli are hereby quashed. . (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Order Date :- 25.7.2025/-Amit K- Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench