Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:111120 Court No. - 79 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 23192 of 2025 Applicant :- Sameer Lather Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Avanish Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri Raunak Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shashi Dhar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant application has been filed with a prayer to quash the charge-sheet dated 31-03-2025, cognizance order dated 03-05- 2025 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 4300 of 2025, arising out of case crime no. 102 of 2025, under Sections 323, 354(a), 354(b), 420, 506, 376 IPC, P.S. Section 113, district Commissionerate Gautambudh Nagar, 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that opposite party no.2 lodged a false and baseless first information report against the applicant. It is contended that soon after the registration of the F.I.R., the victim's statement under Section 180 of the B.N.S.S. was recorded by the Investigating Officer, wherein she did not support the allegations made in the F.I.R. However, subsequently, in her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. before the court below, she introduced an entirely new version of events and admitted to being in a relationship with the applicant. Furthermore, she refused to undergo medical examination. Despite these inconsistencies and the lack of any medical or corroborative evidence, the Investigating Officer, in a mechanical and arbitrary manner, prepared the case diary on 22.03.2025 and added Section 376 I.P.C. without any cogent basis. Thereafter, on 31.03.2025, the police submitted a charge-sheet against the applicant in a routine and perfunctory manner, and on 03.05.2025, the learned Magistrate, without proper application of judicial mind, took cognizance and summoned the applicant for trial. Learned counsel further submits that there was an unexplained delay of more than one year in making the allegations, that Section 376 I.P.C. was added at a later stage, and that the parties were well acquainted with each other and whatever transpired between them was purely consensual. 4. Per contra, Sri Shashi Dhar Pandey, learned A.G.A. submitted that from perusal of F.I.R., it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against the applicant. He further submitted that the court below has rightly taken cognizance against the applicant and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order as well as the on going proceedings. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant. The arguments raised by learned counsel for the applicant are all disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court. 7. 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 482 Cr.P.C. 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. However, it is open for the applicants to take all its defence in the trial. 10. Hence, the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be entertained and is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 11.7.2025 pks Digitally signed by :- PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad