Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:5751 Court No. - 77 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27216 of 2024 Applicant :- Chhuttan Dube Alias Avdhesh Dubey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shalvin Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J. 1. Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Aditya Shankar Prasad holding brief of Sri Anubhav Chandra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dhananjay Awasthi, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as Sri Raj Bahadur Verma, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 3. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the impugned order 12.12.2023 passed by the Additional Session Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Mahoba as well as entire proceedings of Complaint Case/ Session Trial No.1 of 2013 (Mahesh alias Kamlesh Vs. Chhuttan Dubey), under Sections 452, 354, 504, 506 and Section 8 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Khanna, District Mahoba. 4. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that initially an F.I.R. was lodged on 30.06.2020 in Case Crime No.77 of 2020, under Sections 376-C, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., Section 3(1)(da) (dha), 3(2)(Va), 3(2)(V) S.C. and S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 4 of POCSO Act, 2012. Police after investigation has submitted final report but same was rejected by the concerned Magistrate, thereafter, police after further investigation again submitted final report in which protest petition was filed which was allowed and protest petition was registered as complaint case and on the basis of the statement of the witnesses under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., applicant has been summoned. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the impugned proceeding is absolutely malicious as prior dispute has been pending between the parties and just to pressurize the applicant, impugned proceeding has been initiated. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has submitted that from the statement of victim girl recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. even during investigation as well as statement recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C., it is clear that there are specific allegations of sexual assault upon the applicant. Therefore, prima-facie case is made out against the applicant and there is no illegality in the impugned proceeding. 6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of record, it appears that from the record that during investigation of the F.I.R., the statement of the girl was also recorded before the Magistrate, under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she made specific allegation for sexual assault upon the applicant but the police has submitted final report and thereafter even in subsequent investigation final report was again submitted but same was rejected by the court below on the protest petition filed by the first informant and thereafter, complaint proceeding was initiated against the applicant. From the statement of victim-girl recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C., her stand remain undeterred regarding the allegation of sexual assault upon the applicant and even from the medical certificate of C.M.O. dated 09.07.2020, age of the victim has been determined as 12 years, therefore, there is no illegality in the impugned proceeding. 7. In view of the above, this Court does not find any illegality in the impugned proceeding and the present application is dismissed. Order Date :- 10.1.2025 Jitendra Digitally signed by :- JITENDRA KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad