Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:47094 Court No. - 70 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 9900 of 2025 Applicant :- Bijendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Haya Rizvi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Heard Mr. Mohd. Bilal Advocate holding brief of Ms. Haya Rizvi, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1. 2. Perused the record. 3. Applicant-Bijendra, who is a charge sheeted accused and facing trial before court below, has approached this Court by means of present application under Section 528 BNSS with the following prayer:- "It is, therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow the present application and quashed the entire proceeding of Session Trial No. 1077 of 2024 (State Vs. Vijendra) arising out of case crime No. 531 of 2018 under section 328, 504, 506, 509, 376, 384 I.P.C., Police Station Dadari, District Gautam Buddh Nagar as well as cognizance order dated 06.05.2019 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial III, Gautam Buddh Nagar pending in the court of Session Judge Gautam Buddh Nagar. And it is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased Stay the effect and operation of further proceeding of Session Trial No. 1077 of 2024 (State Vs. Vijendra) arising out of case crime No. 531 of 2018 under section 328, 504, 506, 509, 376, 384 I.P.C., Police Station Dadari, District Gautam Buddh Nagar as well as cognizance order dated 06.05.201.9trate passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial, III, Gautam Buddh Nagar pending in the court of Session Judge Gautam Buddh Nagar, otherwise the applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury." 4. On the matter being taken up, Court raised a pointed query to the learned counsel for applicant as to whether the charges have been framed against applicant by court below in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 228 Cr.P.C. or not. Learned counsel for applicant fairly submits that the charges have been framed against applicant by court below vide Framing of Charge Order dated 22.10.2024. 5. At this juncture, the learned A.G.A. submits that framing of charge order has not been specifically impugned in this application nor another application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed challenging the framing of charge order passed by court below. In view of above, prayer prayed for by means of present application is misconceived and therefore, present application is liable to be dismissed. 6. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant contended that he be permitted to seek discharge before court below. 7. Submission so made by the learned counsel for applicant is misconceived. Once the framing of charge order has been passed then the question of discharge becomes academic. Similar view has been taken by the Apex Court in Ratilal Bhanji Mithani Vs. State of Maharastra and others, 1979 (2) SCC 179 8. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same. 9. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1 and upon perusal of record this court finds that the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to this application are not only borne out from the record but furthermore, the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record at this stage. As such, no good ground exists to entertain the present application. 10. In view of above, present application fails and is liable to be dismissed. 11. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 3.4.2025 YK Digitally signed by :- YASHWANT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad