HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7049 of 2025 Court No. - 14 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J. 1. On 27.08.2025, the following order was passed:- "1. Shri Ashish Raman Mishra, Advocate has put in appearance by filing Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2, the same is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./ 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed with the following prayer:- "A. To, quash the impugned Charge Sheet dated 14.11.2021 (Annexure No. 1) filed in Case Crime No. 253 of 2021 under section 363, 366, 376 IPC and section 3/4 Pocso Act lodge at Police Station Satrikh, District - Barabanki. B. To, quash the entire Criminal Proceedings as well as the impugned Cognizance Order dated 24.12.2021 (Annexure No. 2) passed by the learned Additional District & Session Judge/Special Judge (Pocso Act), Court No. 44, District Barabanki in Session Case No. 1922/2021 (State vs. Satish Kumar) arising out of Case Crime No. 253 of 2021 under section 363, 366, 376 IPC and section 3/4 Pocso Act lodge at Police Station - Satrikh, District - Barabanki." 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the present FIR was lodged by the father of the alleged prosecutrix though the applicant never committed any offence as is narrated in the FIR. He submits that the opposite party no.2 was major at the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Suresh Kumar Yadav, Poonam Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ashish Raman Mishra Satish .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko. And 4 Others .....Opposite Party(s) time of incident and with her own sweet will, she performed marriage with the applicant. He has drawn attention towards the age certificate issued by the Chief Medical Officer, Barabanki and submitted that as per the ossification report, the age of the victim was 18 years at the time of incident. He added that now there a child of 2 years from their wedlock and they are living as husband and wife and allowing further criminal proceeding against the applicant shall vanish the marital life. 5. In support of his contention, he has placed reliance in the ratio of judgment of Vishwas Bhandari v. State of Punjab and another reported in (2021) 2 Supreme Court Cases 605 and submits that the criminal proceeding against the applicant may be quashed. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2/ victim has supported the version of learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that the opposite party no.2 was major at the time of incident and under certain misconception, the father of the opposite party no.2 lodged the FIR, whereas fact remains that the opposite party no.2 performs the marriage with the applicant and there is a 2 years child from their wedlock and she prays that the criminal proceeding against the applicant may be dropped. 7. Learned A.G.A. appearing for the State though has opposed the matter on merit but he has no objection if the victim was major at the time of incident and she has performed the marriage with the applicant. 8. For the foregoing contentions of learned counsel for the parties, the opposite party no.2 as well as the applicant is directed to remain present before this Court on 09.09.2025 at 02;15 P.M. so that the statement could be recorded. 9. List/ put up this matter on 09.09.2025 at 02:15 P.M. 10. Until further order(s), the criminal proceeding in Session Case No. 1922/2021 (State vs. Satish Kumar), arising out of Case Crime No. 253 of 2021, under section 363, 366, 376 IPC and section 3/4 Pocso Act, Police Station - Satrikh, District - Barabanki, against the applicant shall remain stayed. 11. Learned counsels for the parties shall inform this order to the applicant as well as the opposite party no.2." 2. In compliance of the order aforesaid, the applicant as well as the opposite A482 No. 7049 of 2025 2 party no.2, namely, Neha Rawat is present before this Court and the opposite party no.2/ Neha Rawat is identified by her counsel in the Court. 3. On query being asked to opposite party no.2, she submits that she has performed marriage with the applicant in the year 2021 and she is residing with the applicant and she has two year child from their wedlock. 4. In view of the statement of the alleged victim/ opposite party no.2 and the law laid down in the case of Vishwas Bhandari v. State of Punjab and another, (2021) 2 Supreme Court Cases 605, the criminal proceeding arising out of Case Crime No. 253 of 2021, under section 363, 366, 376 IPC and section 3/4 Pocso Act, Police Station - Satrikh, District - Barabanki, is hereby quashed. 5. Consequences to follow. 6. Consigned to records. September 9, 2025 Mohd. Sharif A482 No. 7049 of 2025 3 (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench