TEJ PRATAP RAIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                 APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 7183 of 2026

Tej Pratap Rai
                                                            .....Applicant(s)
                                   Versus

State of U.P. and Another
                                                                .....Opposite
                                                                      Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                    :   Kamal Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)               :   G.A.

Court No. - 80
                   HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the
State perused the record.

2. This application has been filed by the applicant to quash the entire
proceeding of Criminal Case No.11188 of 2025 (CNR No.UPMA-0401-
5626-2025) (State Vs. Tej Pratap) arising out of Case Crime No.245 of
2024, under Section 376 IPC, Police Station Doharighat, District Mau,
pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mau.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the proceeding
initiated against the applicant is illegal and against the material available
on record; the material of investigation does not disclose commission of
any alleged offences against the applicant and as such the proceedings
initiated against the applicant including the impugned charge-sheet and
cognizance/summoning order are liable to be quashed by this
Court. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the FIR
was lodged against the applicant on the basis of an application moved
under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C./175(3) BNSS after more than one year and
five months. It is alleged in the FIR that the incident had taken place on
29.07.2023, and in respect of the same incident, the victim had entered
into a compromise with other persons, namely Anshu Rai and Ajay Rai
alias Sonu Rai. General and vague allegations have been levelled against
the applicant, and it has come in the inquiry report that no such kind of
incident, as alleged by the victim, had ever taken place.
                                                                                            NA528 No. 7183 of 2026
                                                                    2


                                    4. Per contra, learned AGA for the State vehemently opposed the prayer
                                    as made in the application and rebutted the stand taken up by learned
                                    counsel for applicant by way of submitting that the averments whatsoever
                                    has been raised by learned counsel for applicant is subject matter of trial
                                    and submitted that after considering the material available on record,
                                    charge-sheet has been submitted against the applicant upon which learned
                                    court concerned has rightly taken cognizance and summoned the
                                    applicant. It is further submitted that the victim has categorically stated in
                                    her statement that she was subjected to rape by the applicant. The defence
                                    of the applicant cannot be appreciated at this stage. The Court is required
                                    to see at this stage whether a prima facie offence is made out from the
                                    perusal of the victim’s statement recorded during the course of
                                    investigation, and it is clear that a prima facie offence is made out from
                                    the perusal of the statements of the victim; therefore, the proceedings,
                                    charge-sheet, and cognizance order cannot be quashed at this stage.

                                    5. After hearing rival submissions extended by learned counsel for the
                                    parties and by bare perusal of record, there appears to be no illegality and
                                    impropriety in the impugned charge-sheet and cognizance/summoning
                                    order and as such learned court concerned has rightly proceeded against
                                    the applicant.

                                    6. In view thereof, the instant application under Section 528 B.N.S.S.
                                    lacks merit and is hereby dismissed.



                                                                                        (Vivek Kumar Singh,J.)
                                    April 20, 2026
                                    Radhika




Digitally signed by :-
RADHIKA VISHWAKARMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad