Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:3404 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22758 of 2024 Applicant :- Vinod Bhojywal And Another Opposite Party :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Saroj Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- Akhilesh Kumar Tiwari,G.A.,Jitendra Kumar Maurya Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicants, the learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent, and the learned counsel for the complainant, and perused the records. 2. The present application has been filed seeking to quash the charge sheet dated 24.04.2024, the cognizance order dated 18.05.2024, and the entire proceedings of S.S.T. No. 101 of 2024, titled State v. Manoj Kumar Bhojyawal and Others, arising out of Case Crime No. 168 of 2023. The case pertains to offenses under Section 363 and Section 120-B of IPC and Sections 17/18 of the POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Machhlishahar, and is currently pending before the learned Additional District Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Jaunpur. 3. The learned counsel for the applicants contends that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. It is argued that the applicants are the elder brothers of the main accused, who allegedly enticed the complainant's minor daughter and stayed with her in Delhi. The counsel highlights that no allegations have been made against the applicants in the charge sheet and refers to the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. by the police and under Section 164 Cr.P.C. by the Magistrate. 4. Learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. have not disputed the submissions advanced by the applicants' counsel and have stated that although the applicants' names appear in the FIR, they have been exonerated by the victim in the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. The allegations are against the main accused, Manoj Kumar Bhojyawal. 5. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the applicants, the complainant, and the learned A.G.A., it has emerged that while the applicants' names are mentioned in the FIR, but there is no reference of them in the victim's statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. Furthermore, although the charge sheet includes an offense under Section 120-B IPC, no acts or material evidence have been presented to substantiate the essential elements of conspiracy under this section qua applicants. 6. 6. In view of the above, the Court finds merit in the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants. Accordingly, the entire proceedings of S.S.T. No. 101 of 2024, titled State v. Manoj Kumar Bhojyawal and Others, arising out of Case Crime No. 168 of 2023, under Sections 363 and 120-B IPC and Sections 17/18 of the POCSO Act, pending before the learned Additional District Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Jaunpur, are hereby quashed qua the applicants. 7. Consequently, the instant application is allowed. Order Date :- 7.1.2025 Anil K. Sharma Justice Vinod Diwakar Digitally signed by :- ANIL KUMAR SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad