Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:63779 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 13011 of 2025 Applicant :- Santosh @ Santosh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Gyan Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J. 1. Heard Sri Gyan Prakash, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 27.12.2021 as well as summoning/ cognizance order dated 02.08.2022 passed by Civil Judge (J.D.)/J.M./FTC (Crime against Women), Kasganj including the entire proceedings of Case No.65 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No.15 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 377, 354 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Kasganj, pending in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.)/J.M.FTC (Crime against Women), Kasganj. 3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant was never married to opposite party no.2 and impugned proceeding is absolutely malicious. In support of his contention, counsel for the applicant has also relied upon the police report dated 18.03.2016 which was submitted by the Inspector of the concerned police station to concerned Superintendent of Police mentioning therein that the opposite party no.2 got married to Dinesh Kumar 7 years back and thereafter both of them separated. 4. Per contra, learned AGA submitted that there is sufficient material against the applicants which shows that the cognizable offence is made out against the applicant, which is sufficient for initiation of trial. 5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and perusal of record, it appears that there is sufficient material against the applicant, he continuously harassed and beaten the opposite party no.2. 6. From perusal of police report dated 18.03.2016 relied upon by the counsel for the applicant, it is clear that this report was prepared in the year 2016 and this report clearly reflected that the opposite party no.2 initially got married to Dinesh Kumar. Subsequently she separated from Dinesh Kumar and got married to the applicant. So far as contention of counsel for the applicant that he has never married to opposite party no.2 is disputed question of fact which can be decided during trial. There is sufficient material on record to proceed for trial, no case is made out for quashing the proceeding. 7. In view of above, this Court does not find any good ground to interfere in the matter. Accordingly, the present application is dismissed. 8. However, it is provided that in case, the applicant appears before the court below and applies for bail, his bail application shall be considered and decided in view of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2021 SCC Online SC 922. Order Date :- 25.4.2025 A.Kr. Digitally signed by :- AJAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad