Dismissed¶15

Aditya Rawat v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Allahabad HC5 May 2025A482/10507/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing application dismissed; framing of charges held not illegal where no discharge application under Section 227 Cr.P.C. was moved; POCSO and SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) charges with IPC 342/354/504/506; F.I.R./Case Crime No.953/2022, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, Pratapgarh; S.S.T. No.98/2023 State vs. Aditya Rawat; Special Judge (POCSO Act) Pratapgarh; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench, Manish Kumar J., order date 5.5.2025, Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:25921.

What did the court decide?

It being an admitted case that the applicant had not moved any discharge application, there is no illegality on the part of the court concerned in framing charges against the applicant. ¶14

Aditya Rawat Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:25921

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10507 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Aditya Rawat Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Pushpakar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

¶7

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with the following main reliefs:

¶8

"Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the charge sheet dated 21.11.2022 filed by the Investigating Officer in F.I.R./Case Crime No.953/2022, under Section 342, 354, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 9(M)/10 POCSO Act and Section 3(1)Da, 3(1)Dha, 3(1)Ba & 3(2)5Ka SC/ST Act, Police StationKotwali Nagar, District- Pratapgarh., contained in Annexure No.1 to this petition.

¶9

This Hon'ble Court further be pleased to quash the summoning order dated 13.1.2024, passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Pratapgarh in S.S.T. No.98/2023 (State vs. Aditya Rawat) arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No.953/2022, under Section 342, 354, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 9(M)/10 POCSO Act and Section 3(1)Da, 3(1) Dha, 3(1)Ba & 3(2)5Ka SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Pratapgarh and order dated 23.4.2024, passed learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Pratapgarh whereby in S.S.T. No.98/2023 (State vs. Aditya Rawat) arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No.953/2022, under Section 342, 354, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 9(M)/10 POCSO Act and Section 3(1)Da, 3(1)Dha, 3(1)Ba & 3(2)5Ka SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Pratapgarh, contained in Annexure No.2 and 3 to this petition.

¶10

This Hon'ble Court further quash the entire criminal proceeding of criminal S.S.T. No.98/2023 (State vs. Aditya Rawat) arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No.953/2022, under Section 342, 354, 504, 506 I.P.C and Section 9(M)/10 POCSO Act and Section 3 (1)Da, 3(1)Dha, 3(1)Ba & 3(2)5Ka SC/ST Act, Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District Pratapgarh which is pending before the learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Pratapgarh.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant appeared before the court concerned on 23.4.2024 and on the very same day, the charges have been framed without giving any opportunity to the applicant for moving a discharge application under Section 227 Cr.P.C.

¶12

On being asked from the learned counsel for the applicant where is the discharge application which the applicant tried to move before the court concerned, he has very fairly replied that the applicant did not appear along

¶13

with any discharge application and no discharge application has been moved.

¶14

Since it is an admitted case of the applicant that no discharge application has been moved then there is no illegality on the part of the court concerned to frame charges against the applicant.

¶15

In view of above, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merit, accordingly, it is dismissed .

¶16

Order Date :- 5.5.2025 AKK

¶17

Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Aditya Rawat v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aditya Rawat v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vinay Kumar @ Vinay Kumar Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Tribhuwan Dutta Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Maya Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 6 Others

Mahendra Pratap Singh and Another vs Deputy Director of Consolidation, Barabanki and Others

Aditya Rawat vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Ghanshyam Tiwari vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another