Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:110068 Court No. - 79 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 24003 of 2025 Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Vishal Tandon Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri Vishal Tandon, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri J.K. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State-O.P. no.1 and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicants praying for quashing chargesheet dated 07.04.2025 along with summoning order dated 19.06.2025 as well as entire proceedings of S.S.T. no.370/25 arising out of Case Crime No.0426 of 2024 (State vs. Pramod and another) under section 70(1), 333 B.N.S., Section 5/6 POCSO Act and Section 3(2)v of S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Hasanpur, District-Amroha pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge/POCSO Act, First, Amroha so far as it relates to the applicant or to stay further proceedings of the case during pendency of the application. 3. In the instant matter, an FIR was lodged by O.P. no.2 on 14.08.2024 wherein it has been alleged that one Lavi @ Shivan has committed rape on the informant. During investigation, statement of the victim/informant was recorded under section 180 and 183 Cr.P.C. wherein the name of the present applicant surfaced and after completion of investigation, on 07.04.2025, charge sheet has been submitted. Thereafter, court below has taken cognizance on 19.06.2025. The chargesheet as well as cognizance order along with the entire proceedings qua the present applicant has been challenged in this application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that there was no allegation against the applicant in the FIR. He further submitted that the victim/O.P. no.2 in order to fill up the lacuna of the prosecution story has taken the name of the applicant in her statement. He further submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has never committed any offence as alleged against him. He further argued that the real fact is that the applicant avails the tiffin service run by mother of O.P. nop.2 and she has taken loan of Rs.1.5 lakh from the applicant and when the applicant asked back the amount, he has been falsely implicated in the instant case by her daughter. He contended that the applicant is a government servant and if he is arrested, his career prospects may adversely get affected. Further submission is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the court below has utterly failed to consider that no prima facie case is made out against the applicants. He also pointed out certain documents in support of his contention. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the application and contended that there is sufficient evidence on record to show that the applicant is involved in commission of the offence as alleged against him. 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 dated 19.06.2025 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 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 applicants. 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 cannot be entertained and is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 10.7.2025 Manish Himwan Digitally signed by :- MANISH HIMWAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad