HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1390 of 2026 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE ABDUL SHAHID, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist. 2. The present criminal revision has been filed against the order dated 23.01.2026 passed by the Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge/F.T.C.-II, Deoria, in Sessions Trial No. 705 of 2025 (State vs. Ajay Kumar Mishra), arising out of Case Crime No. 1248 of 2011, Police Station Kotwali, District Deoria, under Sections 376, 366, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The revision has also been filed against the order dated 23.01.2026 by which charges have been framed against the revisionist/applicant under Sections 376, 366, and 506 I.P.C. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that Case Crime No. 1248 of 2011 was registered under Section 366 I.P.C. at Police Station Kotwali, District Deoria. The allegations have been levelled against the revisionist, Ajay Kumar Mishra, who is stated to be the Principal. 4. Learned counsel for the revisionist has relied upon the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., wherein she has stated that she is major, aged about 23 years. As per the medical ossification test, she appears to be about 21 years of age; in either case, she is major and a consenting party. It is further submitted that she consistently resided with the revisionist for about two months and travelled with him from Gorakhpur to Delhi, then to Goa, thereafter to Gorakhpur, and subsequently to Varanasi. 5. After detailed investigation, a charge sheet was filed against the revisionist under Sections 376, 366, and 506 I.P.C. A discharge application Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Rajrshi Gupta, Utkarsh Prasad Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ajay Kumar Mishra .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) was filed by the revisionist before the learned trial court, which was rejected vide order dated 23.01.2026. Thereafter, charges were also framed on the same date under Sections 376, 366, and 506 I.P.C. 6. The question of consent is a question of fact which is to be decided by the learned trial court after recording the evidence of the prosecution. The allegations levelled are serious and heinous in nature. At this stage, when the discharge application has already been rejected and charges have been framed, no prima facie finding on the factual issue of consent can justifiably be recorded. 7. In view of the aforesaid, there is neither any illegality nor irregularity in the impugned orders. 8. The criminal revision lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. February 24, 2026 K.K. Maurya CRLR No. 1390 of 2026 2 (Abdul Shahid,J.) Digitally signed by :- KAMLESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad