Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:18859 Court No. - 14 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2082 of 2025 Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Pathak And 2 Other Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Kr. Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. 1. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. read with Section 528 Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant with the following prayer:- "Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash the impugned order dated 04.02.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO) Act in VNR No. UPBH010054792024, S.T. No. 964/22024 (State vs. Rohit & Ors.) only to the extent whereby learned Special Judge (POCSO) Act summoned the petitioners under Section 363 IPC and Section 16/17 of POCSO Act in Case Crime No. 148/2024, Police Station Visheshwarganj, District Bahraich contained at Annexure No. 2 in the interest of justice. As an interim measures this Hon'ble Court kindly be pleased to stay the operation and implementation of impugned order dated 04.02.2025 in respect of petitioners during the pendency of instant petition, in the interest of justice." 2. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the FIR under Section 363 IPC was lodged against the unknown person by the respondent no. 4 i.e. father of the alleged prosecutrix/victim that her daughter has been abducted by someone. 3. It is further submitted that after sometime, the victim was caught by the Police along with one Rohit (main accused) and recorded the statement of the victim wherein she had made an allegation against Rohit but nothing has been said against the present applicants but while giving her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she had taken the name of the applicants that they forced her to go along with Rohit and she went along with Rohit from Gonda to Lucknow by train and thereafter from Lucknow to Delhi by train and stayed there with Rohit for 20 to 25 days where she was physically abused by the main accused Rohit. It is further submitted that the main accused Rohit has already been granted bail by order dated 24.07.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 7956 of 2024 (Annexure No. 12), against whom the allegation of offence under Section 376(2)(n) IPC is also made. 4. It is further submitted that there is contradiction in the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. which makes the whole story false as the applicants and the family of the victim are pattidar and there is enmity and differences between them, so the applicants have falsely been implicated in the present case. 5. On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted that in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim/prosecutrix has made a statement giving specific role against the applicants. The trial court after considering the statements of the independent witnesses given under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has taken cognizance and issued the summoning order as the applicants are charged under Sections 363 IPC and Section 16/17 of POCSO Act. Hence there is no illlegality in the order. 6. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that liberty may be given to the applicants to file bail application before the trial court which may be directed to be decided in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2022) 10 S.C.R. 351 : (2022) 10 SCC 51 and Musheer Alam vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another, 2025 SCC Online SC 116, and also to prefer a discharge application before the court below and the same may also be directed to be decided expeditiously. 7. Learned A.G.A has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants. 8. Keeping in view the aforesaid, the present application is disposed of with liberty as prayed for and with a direction to the court below that if the applicants apply for bail before the court concerned, prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. 9. Liberty is also granted to the applicants to move discharge application before the court below, and the same shall be decided expeditiously, in accordance with law, if there is no any other legal impediment. 10. Taking note of the facts of the case and also the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (Supra) and Musheer Alam (Supra), this Court is of the view that it would be appropriate to observe that it is expected from the Police Officer concerned that for a period of 30 days from today or till the applicants apply for bail, whichever is earlier, they would not take any coercive action against the applicants in the aforesaid case. Order Date :- 4.4.2025 Nitesh Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench