X JUVENILEversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                 APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34796 of 2025

X Juvenile
                                                               .....Applicant(s)
                                    Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others
                                                                  .....Opposite
                                                                        Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Deepak Kumar             Srivastava,    Rajesh
                                Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 81
                    HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.

1. List revised. None present for informant.

2. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and
learned A.G.A. for the State.

3. The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed for
setting aside the impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 04.01.2025
passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Moradabad and charge sheet No.1 of
2025 dated 2.1.2025 as well as entire criminal proceeding of S.C. No.235 of
2025 (State Vs. Nigam Deval) arising out of Case Crime No.910 of 2024
under Section 137(2), 64 B.N.S. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station
Civil Lines, District Moradabad, pending before learned Special Judge
(POCSO) Court No.1, Moradabad.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the opposite party No.2
lodged a First Information Report dated 7.10.2024 against unknown persons
as Case Crime No. 910 of 2024 under Section 137(2) of the B.N.S. He
further submitted that the applicant was not named in the said F.I.R. During
investigation, the Investigating Officer recorded the statement of the
informant under Section 180 of the B.N.S.S., who supported the prosecution
version. The statement of the prosecutrix was also recorded under Section
180 of the B.N.S.S., wherein she did not level any allegation against the
applicant. Subsequently, in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the
B.N.S.S., she, for the first time, alleged that the applicant committed rape. It
is further submitted that during medical examination no external injury was
found on her body to support the allegation of rape. After completion of
                                                        NA528 No. 34796 of 2025
                                2


investigation, a charge sheet was submitted against the applicant. It is
contended that there exists a material contradiction between the statements
of the prosecutrix recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S.S., and
as such, no prima facie case is made out against the applicant on the basis of
the evidence collected during investigation. It is, therefore, submitted that
the learned Juvenile Justice Board has erred in taking cognizance against the
applicant, and the impugned cognizance order dated 04.1.2025, along with
the entire proceedings, is liable to be quashed.

5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the submissions and
contended that the First Information Report was duly lodged by the
informant. During investigation, the statements of the prosecutrix were
recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S.S. It is further submitted
that in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., the
prosecutrix has supported the prosecution case and specifically alleged the
commission of rape by the applicant. It is also pointed out that the age of the
prosecutrix at the time of the alleged incident was about 13½ years. After
completion of investigation, a charge sheet was filed against the applicant.
The learned Juvenile Justice Board has taken cognizance on the basis of the
material collected during investigation, and no illegality has been committed
in doing so. Accordingly, the present application is liable to be dismissed.

6. From the facts of the present case, it transpires that the father of the
prosecutrix (opposite party No.2) lodged the F.I.R. under Section 137(2) of
the B.N.S. at Police Station Civil Lines, District Moradabad, against
unknown persons. During investigation, the statement of the prosecutrix was
recorded under Section 180 of the B.N.S.S., wherein she did not make any
allegation regarding the commission of rape by the applicant. However, in
her subsequent statement recorded under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., she
alleged that the applicant committed rape. After completion of investigation,
the charge sheet was submitted. The learned Juvenile Justice Board
thereafter took cognizance on the basis of the material available on
record. At this stage, it also cannot be said that no prima facie case is made
out against the applicant.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not
find any illegality or perversity in the impugned order passed by the learned
Juvenile Justice Board. The cognizance has been taken on the basis of
evidence collected during investigation, which cannot be interfered with at
                                                                                             NA528 No. 34796 of 2025
                                                                     3


                                    this stage. Therefore, the prayer for setting aside the same is hereby refused.

                                    8. Accordingly, the application is dismissed.



                                                                                            (Chawan Prakash,J.)
                                    April 7, 2026
                                    Md Faisal




Digitally signed by :-
MOHD FAISAL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad