HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 23122 of 2025 Court No. - 80 HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J. 1. Sri Ravikant Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vinod Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and Sri Prashant Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party no.1. 2. Present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been preferred for quashing the charge-sheet dated 21.12.2024 as well as summoning/ cognizance order dated 24.04.2025 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Jaunpur, in Case No. 7348 of 2025 (State of U.P. Vs. Mandeep and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 241 of 2022, under Sections 376-D, 354, 504, 506, 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Gaura Badshahpur, District Jaunpur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the proceeding initiated against the applicant is illegal and against the material available on record; the material of investigation does not disclose commission of any alleged offences against the applicant and as such the proceedings initiated against the applicant including the impugned charge-sheet and cognizance/summoning order are liable to be quashed by this Court. It is further submitted that the FIR of the present case was lodged on 30.12.2022 in respect of the alleged incident dated 27.10.2022, and no plausible explanation has been given by the prosecution. A malicious prosecution was launched by the victim of the present case on account of previous enmity. The victim of the same case had lodged an NCR under Section 155 Cr.P.C. on 30.10.2022 in respect of the incident dated 29.10.2022, but no allegation was levelled in the NCR dated 30.10.2022 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ravikant Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Praveen Kumar Dubey, Vinod Kumar, G.A. Mandeep .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) that any incident had taken place with her on 27.10.2022. Therefore, considering this fact and other facts, the Investigating Officer submitted a final report in this case, which has been appended as Annexure No.13 to the application. However, further investigation was conducted by the Investigating Officer, and false statements were recorded by him, and the witnesses who were earlier examined by the Investigating Officer, changed their version and levelled false allegations against the applicant. 4. Per contra, learned AGA for the State as well as learned counsel for opposite party no.2 vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the application and rebutted the stand taken up by learned counsel for applicant by way of submitting that the averments whatsoever has been raised by learned counsel for applicant is subject matter of trial and submitted that after considering the material available on record, charge- sheet has been submitted against the applicant upon which learned court concerned has rightly taken cognizance and summoned the applicant. 5. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 as well as the A.G.A. that the victim, in her statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., has categorically stated that she was subjected to rape by the applicant and ignoring the statements of the victim, the Investigating Officer, in connivance with the applicant, wrongly and illegally submitted a final report, which was not accepted by the court concerned, and thereafter a charge sheet was submitted after due investigation on 21.12.2024. The learned court concerned, rightly and correctly considering the material available in the case diary, took cognizance of the offence vide order dated 24.04.2025. The disputed questions of fact cannot be considered by this Court in this jurisdiction. This Court cannot appreciate the material available on record, and it is only required to see whether any prima facie offence is made out against the applicant or not. It is further submitted that, from the perusal of the statements of the witnesses, including the victim, a prima facie offence is made out. Therefore, no interference by this Court at this stage is required. 6. After hearing rival submissions extended by learned counsel for the parties and by bare perusal of record, there appears to be no illegality and NA528 No. 23122 of 2025 2 impropriety in the impugned charge-sheet and cognizance/summoning order and as such learned court concerned has rightly proceeded against the applicant. 7. In view thereof, the instant application under Section BNSS lacks merit and is hereby dismissed. April 23, 2026 Radhika NA528 No. 23122 of 2025 3 (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