PANKAJ MAURYA Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Abhishek Kumar Jaiswal (AoR No. A/A 2063/2013), holding brief of Sri Shravan Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Abhishek Tripathi, learned A.G.A. and Sri Anurag Upadhyay, for O.P. No.2.

(2.) This is an application under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure preferred by the applicant for quashing the summoning order dtd. 13/11/2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (POCSO), Court No.1, Mau including the entire proceeding of Special Session Case No.917 of 2024 (State Vs. Pankaj Maurya), under Sec. 452, 504, 506, 354 IPC, Sec. 7/8 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 & Sec. 3(1)Da of SC/ST Act, Police Station Saraylakhanshi, District Mau, pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (POCSO), Court No.1, Mau as well as the impugned summoning order dated summoning order dtd. 22/10/2024 passed by learned Special Judge (Juvenile Court), Court No.1/Additional Sessions Judge, Mau in Complaint Case No.02 of 2023 (Sarita Vs. Pankaj Maurya), under Sec. 452, 504, 506, 354 IPC, Sec. 7/8 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 and Sec. 3(1)Da of SC/ST Act, Police Station Saraylakhanshi, District Mau.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a complaint stood lodged by O.P. No.2 under Sec. 156(3) of CrPC with an allegation that on 7/3/2023 at 10:00 in the night her daughter 'X' who was aged about 16 years was subjected to a treatment which encompassed outraging of modesty by the applicant and when she screamed then the complainant came forward to rescue her. However, the applicant thereafter overpowered her and tried to disrobe with intention of committing a bad act. Allegation is also to the extent that caste-based abuses were also hurled. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated as there happens to be a civil suit instituted by the father of the applicant and post his death, applicant stood substituted in the year 1992, in which there happens to be an order of the writ-Court directing the said proceeding to be decided expeditiously while not fixing a date more than a week. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is an outcome of the said civil suit and obtaining of an order, which became a basis for lodging of the criminal proceeding and the complaint stood lodged on 1/4/2023. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned proceedings are nothing but a personal vendetta and a false implication.