Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:121709 Court No. - 79 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 24903 of 2025 Applicant :- Karan Alias Akbar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mrityunjay Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri Mrityunjay Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Kuldeep Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State-O.P. no.1 and perused the record. Vakalatnama filed by Sri Mohd. Zakir, Advocate on behalf of O.P. no.2 is taken on record. 2. The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicants praying for quashing chargesheet dated 25.12.2024 along with cognizance order dated 21.02.2025 in Case No.4745 of 2025 (Karan @ Akbar vs. State of U.P. and others) arising out of Case Crime No.713 of 2024, P.S.Tajganj, District- Agra, u/s 328, 376, 506 IPC or to stay further proceedings of the case during pendency of the application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant informed that initially an FIR was lodged on 03.09.2024 by O.P. no.2 against Karan @ Akbar (present applicant) at Aligarh as Case Crime No.383 of 2024 and it was later on transferred to Agra and registered as Case Crime No.713/2024. 4. As per the FIR version, O.P. no.2 and the applicant were working in the same company in the year 2021 and they get acquainted with each other. Thereafter, applicant proposed to marry O.P. no.2 to which she agreed. Then, in March, 2021 the applicant took the informant to a hotel in Agra and committed rape after giving intoxicating substance in cold drink and he even filmed it, in fact, video as well as photographs were developed. When the informant regained consciousness, the applicant promised to marry her soon. But after the said incident, the applicant started blackmailing her to make physical relation with the threat to release her obscene video and photographs in public domain. Thereafter, the applicant committed her rape several times at various places and being fed up with all this, the informant investigated about him and came to know that his actual name is Akbar and he is resident of Bharatpur, Rajasthan. After registration of FIR, investigation of the matter was done by the I.O. and evidence of the victim and witnesses were recorded and medical examination of the victim was carried out. After completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed on 25.12.2024 and the trial court has took cognizance on 21.02.2025. The chargesheet and cognizance order have been assailed by means of the instant application. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further argued that the real fact is that the informant was having consensual relationship with the applicant and the applicant never made any promise of marriage. To buttress his argument he has placed reliance on a judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and another, (2019) 9 SCC 608. He further contended that the instant proceedings is pure abuse of process of law and as such, the same is liable to be quashed. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for O.P. no.2 as well as learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the application and contended that the applicant has committed the alleged crime by misrepresenting himself with a different name. They further submitted that the applicant has repeatedly committed rape of the informant/O.P. no.2 at various places. They next argued that the averments made on behalf of the applicant in this application can only be adjudicated upon after adducing evidence. They further submitted that the informant has fully corroborated the prosecution version in her statements recorded under section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. At last, they added that disputed questions of fact are involved in this matter, which cannot be looked into by this court while exercising inherent jurisdiction conferred under section 482 Cr.P.C. and the same can only be gone through and decided by the trial court. 7. 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 21.02.2025 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. 8. 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. 9. 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. 10. However, it is open for the applicants to take all its defence in the trial. 11. Hence, the instant application cannot be entertained and is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 24.7.2025 Manish Himwan Digitally signed by :- MANISH HIMWAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad