Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:27957 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 6376 of 2025 Applicant :- Manisha Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Brij Raj,Shivam Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused material on record. 2. The instant application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 11.09.2023 and cognizance order dated 18.10.2023 in Case No.2283 of 2023, titled State v. Sumit and 5 Ors, arising out of Case Crime No.779 of 2023, under Section 11 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, P.S. Kotwali City, District Bijnor. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and she has been falsely implicated in the instant case with an ulterior motive. The victim is the daughter of the applicant's, Mausi, who is resident of a resident of Pundoli, P.S. Ghansali, District Tihari Garhwal. The applicant was only Barati during the solemnization of marriage, and she has no role in the solemnization of marriage and is not related to any of the activities performed during marriage. The informant is the step father of the victim. As there is a pending matrimonial dispute between the applicant's husband, Sanjeet, who happens to be the victim's step father's friend, the applicant has been falsely arrayed as an accused in the present case. The applicant is a teacher at Cambridge Convent School, Kasba & P.S. Sardar City, District Chooru (Rajasthan. Learned counsel further relied upon the order dated 02.07.2025, passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in Application u/s 482 No. 2344 of 2024 filed on behalf of the victim's husband. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that the victim was aged about 14 years and seven months at the time of registration of FIR and was studying in class 9th and her date of birth is 05.11.2008. As per the birth certificate, it is admitted that the victim was a minor at the time of solemnization of marriage. The ingredients of Section 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, are satisfied. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and having gone through the material available on record, its prima facie observed that the victim was aged about 14 years and seven months at the time of solemnization of marriage as her date of birth is 05.11.2008. The applicant has solemnized the marriage of a minor girl which attracts Section 11 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006. Therefore, no case for quashing of impugned proceedings is made out. 6. So far as the submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant is concerned, it call for determination on questions of fact which may be adequately adjudicated upon only by the trial court. Adjudication of questions of facts and appreciation of evidence or examining the reliability and credibility of the version does not fall within the arena of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In view of the material on record, it can also not be held that the impugned criminal proceedings are manifestly attended with mala fide and maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. Similarly, no such illegality, perversity or any other substantial error could be pointed out in the impugned summoning order so as to warrant any interference by this court in the exercise of powers u/s 482 Cr.P.C. 7. The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merit, and it is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 27.2.2025 A. Tripathi Justice Vinod Diwakar Digitally signed by :- AKHILESH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad