HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 21675 of 2025 Court No. - 80 HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State-opposite party no.1. 2. Present application u/s 528 BNSS has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding including impugned orders dated 04.04.2025 and 15.05.2025 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C, Court No.02 Rampur in Session Trial No.275 of 2023 (State Vs Rajendra Maurya) arising out of Case Crime No.100 of 2023, under sections 376, 341 I.P.C., Police Station Kemari, District Rampur, pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C, Court No.02, Rampur. 3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is being wrongly tried before the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Rampur. The alleged incident took place in Rudrapur (State of Uttarakhand); therefore, his trial should have been conducted by the court at Rudrapur (Uttarakhand). He moved a discharge application before the learned trial court under Section 227 Cr.P.C. on the same ground, which was wrongly and illegally rejected by the learned trial court vide orders dated 04.04.2025 and 15.05.2025. 4. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer and submitted that the offence was committed partly in Rampur (State of U.P.) and partly in Rudrapur (State of Uttarakhand), and in terms of Section 178 of Cr.P.C. / 198 B.N.S.S., when it is uncertain in which of several local areas an offence was committed, it may be tried by a Court having jurisdiction over any of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Krishna Kant Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rajendra Maurya .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) such local areas. Furthermore, all the prosecution witnesses have been examined in the trial court, and the case is at an advance stage. This plea cannot be decided at this stage. 5. In view of the above, the learned trial court did not commit any illegality or jurisdictional error in the trial of the accused/applicant. 6. The application lacks merit and deserves to be dismissed. It is, accordingly, dismissed. April 23, 2026 Radhika NA528 No. 21675 of 2025 2 (Vivek Kumar Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- RADHIKA VISHWAKARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RADHIKA VISHWAKARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad