Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:115374 Court No. - 79 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 20072 of 2025 Applicant :- Arjun @ Chaudhary Arjun Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Umesh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri Umesh Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jyoti Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State-O.P. no.1 and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the applicant praying for quashing of summoning order dated 06.11.2024 as well as entire proceedings of S.C. No.1071 of 2024 (State of U.P. v. Arjun) arising out of Chargesheet dated 05.10.2025 arising out of Case Crime No.0236 of 2024, under Sections 354(C), 354(D), 376, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Bhagatpur, District Moradabad pending before the Court of Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No.2, Moradabad. 3. In the instant matter, an FIR was lodged by O.P. no.2 against the applicant on 05.09.2024 alleging that the applicant, who is close relative of the victim used to visit her house frequently and recorded a video of the victim while she was taking bath, it is further alleged that the applicant threatened, blackmailed the victim and made physical relation and whenever the victim opposed his activities she was threatened to post the said video on Social Media. In the said case, after investigation chargesheet was filed and summons have been issued on 06.11.2024. The entire proceedings have been challenged in this application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS are contradictory to the FIR version. He also submits that the FIR has been lodged with a long delay without any proper explanation. The applicant was having affair with the victim since 2018. The date of birth of the victim is 06.06.2004, she was major at the time of lodging of FIR, hence, no offence under Section 3/4 POCSO Act is made out against the applicant. He next contended that the instant proceedings is nothing else but a pure abuse of process of law. Further submission is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the court below has utterly failed to consider that no prima facie case is made out against the applicant. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the application and contended that the applicant is Mama of the victim, he had made video of the victim while she was taking bath, thereafter, blackmailed and rapped her since the age of 13 years, hence, the offence under the POCSO Act is clearly made out against the applicant. He further submits that when the victim got married with some other person, the applicant has divulged the entire story to her husband due to which her marital life has been spoiled. It is further submitted that the Court below has rightly summoned the applicants and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order as well as the on going proceedings. 6. From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that prima facie no offence is made out against the applicants. The cognizance order has been issued after perusing the material collected during investigation of the case. The arguments raised by learned counsel for the applicants are all disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 528 BNSS. 7. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matters of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918, R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192, and lastly, Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 has held that only those cases in which no prima facie case is made out can be considered in an application under Section 528 BNSS. 8. The instant application does not fall under the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgments mentioned above, and followed in a number of matters. Moreover, the facts as alleged cannot be said that, prima facie, no offence is made out against the applicant. It is only after the evidence and trial, it can be seen as to whether the offence, as alleged, has been committed or not. 9. Hence, the instant application cannot be entertained and is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 16.7.2025 S.P. Digitally signed by :- SANJAY PURI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SANJAY PURI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad