Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:39015 Court No. - 70 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 8498 of 2025 Applicant :- Amit Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. Head Mr, Ramesh Kumar Pandey the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State/opposite party-1. Perused the record. Applicant- Amit Kumar, who is charge sheeted accused has approached this Court by means of present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. with the following prayer: "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this application and stay the Charge Sheet No. 1 of 2023 dated 16/11/2023 as well as summoning/cognizance order dated 29/11/2023 (arising out of Case Crime No. 433 of 2023) and further proceeding thereof State Vs. Amit Kumar, under sections 376, 452, 506 of IPC, Police Station- Madhuban Bapudham, District- Ghaziabad pending in the Court of Additional District Judge (FTC)-1, Ghaziabad, during the pendency of the present application before this Hon'ble Court. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble court may graciously be pleased to quash the Charge Sheet No. 1 of 2023 dated 16/11/2023 as well as summoning/cognizance order dated 29/11/2023 (arising out of Case Crime No. 433 of 2023) and entire proceeding thereof State Vs. Amit Kumar, under sections 376, 452, 506 of IPC, Police Station- Madhuban Bapudham, District- Ghaziabad pending in the Court of Additional District Judge (FTC)-1, Ghaziabad, and/or pass any such order or direction which this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in circumstances of the case, failing which the applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury." Learned counsel for applicant submits that the criminal prosecution of applicant at the behest of prosecutrix/first informant/opposite party-2 is not only malicious but also an abuse of process of Court. Applicant was working as constable. According to the learned counsel for applicant, first informant/opposite party is the sister of prosecutrix, is also working as lady constable in U.P. Police. She pressurized applicant to marry the prosecutrix. However, applicant denied marrying the prosecutrix. As such, present criminal prosecution has been engineered. He, therefore submits that impugned proceedings are not only malacious but also and abuse of process of Court, the same therefore cannot be sustained. As such, present application is liable to be allowed by this Court. Per contra,the learned A.G.A. for State/opposite party-1 has vehemently opposed the present application. He submits that prosecutrix in her statements under section 161 and 164 cr.P.C. has clearly and fairly supported the F.I.R. The veracity of the said statements cannot be examined at this stage. He, therefore contends that no illegality can be attached to the criminal prosecution of applicant. It is then contended by the learned A.G.A. that even though prosecutrix has not been medically examined but in view of the law laid down by Supreme Court in Phool Singh Vs. State of M.P. (2022) 2 SCC 74, the criminal prosecution of an accused for sexual offence can be sustained even in the absence of medical evidence. He, therefore, submits that no interference is warranted by this Court in present application. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that the preliminary objection raised by learned A.G.A. in opposition to this application is clearly borne out from the record and further the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicant, with reference to the record at this stage. In view of above, present application fails and is liable to be dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 18.3.2025 Arshad Digitally signed by :- ARSHAD MAHMOOD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad