Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:51719 Court No. - 70 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 11509 of 2025 Applicant :- Vineet Maurya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Pavan Kumar Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Heard Mr. Pavan Kumar Kushwaha, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1. 2. Perused the record. 3. Applicant-Vineet Maurya, 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 quash the order dated 03.02.2025 passed by Special Judge (Pocso Act)/Additional District and Session Judge, Pilibhit as well as entire proceeding of Session Case No.1473/2023, State Versus Vineet Maurya, arising out of Case Crime No.354/2023, Under Section 363, 366A, 376(3) I.P.C., and 3/4(2) Pocso Act, Police Station Bilsanda, District Pilibhit. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay the effect and operation of order dated 03.02.2025 passed by Special Judge (Pocso Act)/Additional District and Session Judge, Pilibhit as well as stay the further proceeding of Session Case No.1473/2023, State Versus Vineet Maurya, arising out of Case Crime No.354/2023, Under Section 363, 366A, 376(3) I.P.C., and 3/4(2) Pocso Act, Police Station Bilsanda, District Pilibhit, pending in the court of Special Judge (Pocso Act)/Additional District and Session Judge, Pilibhit, during the pendency of the present application before this Hon'ble Court. And/or pass such other and further order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case." 4. At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. submits that notice of this application under Section 528 BNSS has been served upon first informant/opposite party-4 on 05.04.2025. However, in spite of service of notice, neither any counter affidavit has been filed by first informant/opposite party-4 in opposition to this application nor anyone has put in appearance on his behalf to oppose this application even in revised call 5. On the matter being taken up, the learned A.G.A. invited the attention of Court to the order impugned and on basis thereof, he submits that it appears that the charges have already been framed against applicant. He has referred to the recital occurring at page 20 of the paper book. On the above premise, the learned A.G.A. submits that once the charges have been framed then the question of discharge became academic. To buttress his submission, he has relied upon the judgement of Apex Court in Ratilal Bhanji Mithani Vs. State of Maharastra and others, 1979 (2) SCC 179. On the above premise, the learned A.G.A. submits that present application is misconceived and therefore, liable to be dismissed by this Court. 6. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same. 7. 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. 8. In view of above, present application fails and is liable to be dismissed. 9. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 9.4.2025 YK Digitally signed by :- YASHWANT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad