HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3488 of 2024 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J. 1. Despite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of the revisionist, even in the revised call. 2. Heard learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 to 6, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. A perusal of the order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Court no. 1, Muzaffar Nagar reveals that the Court has relied upon the statement of the victim recorded under under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and held that the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was not supported by any cogent evidence during the course of investigation and the learned trial Court after hearing the protest petition held, that the onus of proving the fact that the victim was pregnant as a consequent of conjuration by Sajid and or Kamal Hasan was upon the victim and also failed to produce any evidence or record of visiting abroad by the accused Kamal Hasan and further held that nothing has come on record that the victim has pressurized Kamal Hasan for getting married with her. 4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has submitted that the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Court no. 1, Muzaffar Nagar is in accordance with law and no illegality or infirmity whatsoever has been committed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge (POCSO) Act, while passing the impugned order. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the opposite parties and learned A.G.A. for the State, this Court finds that the order passed by the Additional Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Lalit Prakash, Narayan Swaroop Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Bipin Kumar, Dev Kumar Yadav, G.A. Hasan Fatma .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P. And 5 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Sessions Judge / Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Court no. 1, Muzaffar Nagar is based on the fact that after collecting the entire material during the course of investigation, the victim failed to bring on record the evidence in her favour, as well as the findings arrived at by the learned Sessions / Special Judge (POCSO) Act reveals that the victim has failed to prove the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. by any cogent evidence or the material collected during the course of investigation, whereas the fact remains that the statement of victim has been recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., then the same is the subject matter of the trial and the complainant / victim would have an opportunity to adduce, whatsoever evidence is available with her, either in the form of documentary evidence or oral, but the findings of learned trial Court arrived at that the victim failed to adduce evidence in support of her case is totally unwarranted and uncalled for, since the entire evidence can be examined during the course of trial and not prior to that, hence the order dated 09.04.2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Court no. 1, Muzaffar Nagar is liable to be set aside and the same is set aside. 6. The learned Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Court no. 1, Muzaffar Nagar is directed to look into the matter afresh, as stated above. 7. The instant revision is accordingly allowed. September 17, 2025 Faridul CRLR No. 3488 of 2024 2 (Harvir Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- FAREEDUL HASAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad