Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:114795 Court No. - 79 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 20577 of 2025 Applicant :- Pooja Batham Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mayank Gaurav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri Sri Mayank Gaurav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shashi Dhar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State, and perused the record. 2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for setting aside the order dated 17-09-2024 as well as entire proceedings of Misc. Case No. 415/11/2024 (State Vs. Pooja Batham), under Sections 376 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, district Farrukhabad. 3. Brief facts necessary for adjudication are that the applicant had alleged that on 22.05.2018 she was raped by one Nikhil Verma under the false pretext of marriage. She claims to have approached the local police station on 23.05.2018 seeking registration of the F.I.R., which was not done. On 04.06.2018, she allegedly attempted self-immolation due to non-registration of the case, following which an F.I.R. under Section 309 I.P.C. was lodged against her and the chargesheet was subsequently filed. 4. Thereafter, the applicant filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on 05.06.2018. Vide order dated 22.09.2018, the learned Magistrate allowed the said application, pursuant to which an F.I.R. was registered on 14.10.2018 under Section 376 I.P.C. against Nikhil Verma. 5. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer filed a Final Report dated 06.01.2019, which was protested by the applicant on 03.04.2019. The protest petition was allowed on 04.05.2019. However, the Investigating Officer again submitted a Final Report dated 13.06.2020. 6. The learned Magistrate rejected the Final Report and ordered further investigation on 06.01.2021. Despite this, another Final Report was submitted on 27.06.2021. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate, without proper application of mind, summoned the applicant under Section 182 I.P.C. by order dated 17.09.2024, which is under challenge. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned order is wholly illegal and passed without any proper appreciation of facts. It is argued that the applicant was a victim and merely sought justice through legal channels. The summoning of the applicant under Section 182 I.P.C. is a gross abuse of the process of law. 8. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the application and submitted that the applicant is in the habit of lodging false and fabricated cases only for her personal gains and with malicious intent to harass others. It is further contended that multiple Final Reports have been filed by the Investigating Officer, finding no merit in the applicant's allegations, and thus the Magistrate has rightly summoned her under Section 182 I.P.C. after due consideration. 9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 10. From the record, it is evident that the applicant had levelled allegations of rape, and after her 156(3) Cr.P.C. application, the matter was duly investigated multiple times. In each instance, the Investigating Officer found no substance in the allegations and filed Final Reports. The protest petitions and directions for reinvestigation did not yield any contrary conclusion. 11. Considering the consistent findings of the investigating agency and the materials on record, the learned Magistrate rightly proceeded under Section 182 I.P.C. against the applicant, taking cognizance of the act of providing false information to a public servant with intent to cause injury to another person. There appears no perversity or illegality in the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate. 12. Accordingly, this Court finds no ground to interfere in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 B.N.S.S. The instant application, is, thus, dismissed. Order Date :- 16.7.2025 pks Digitally signed by :- PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad