JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri I.B. Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Ishan Baghel, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anirudh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State.

2. Instant application under section 482Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 19-12-2022 passed by the learned Special Judge, NIA/ATS/Additional District & Sessions Judge-5, Lucknow in Sessions Case No. 2219 of 2021, arising out of FIR No. 199 of 2020, Police Station-Mant, District-Mathura, under sections 153-A,295A,120-B I.P.C. and sections 17,18, of U.P.P.A. Act, 1967 & sections 65 & 72 of the I.T. Act, 2008. It has further been prayed to direct the learned Special Judge, NIA/ATS/Additional District & Sessions Judge-5, Lucknow to decide the Discharge Application dated 19-12-2022 of the applicant on merit, after affording opportunity of hearing.

3. The factual matrix of the case in brief is that the applicant is a Journalist and was working for AZHIMUKHAM. COM. and when he was travelling to Hathras to cover the incident of "Hathras Gangrape" for reporting, he was arrested and detained under sections 107,116 and 151 of Cr.P.C. on 05-10-2020 and was produced before the SDM Court at Mathura on 06-10-2020 and thereafter, he was sent to judicial remand under section 167 Cr.P.C. However, on 06-10-2022, a false narrative was made in the media that four PFI members have been arrested by the police and thereafter, F.I.R. No. 199 of 2020 dated 07-10-2022 was registered under sections 153-A, 295 A and 124 I.P.C; section 17 & 18 of UAPA Act and 65, 72 & 76 of the IT Act and thereafter, the chargesheet was filed on 02-04-2021 and the matter proceeded.

4. Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the applicant submits that several applications were moved for compliance of Section 207 of Cr.P.C. and ultimately on 07-01-2022, only 106 pages were provided to the applicant and most of the copies are illegible. Thereafter, the applicant moved applications on 21-04-2022 and on 23-09-2022 before the trial court for ensuring compliance of Section 207 of Cr.P.C. He next added that co-accused, Firoz has been provided as many as 4872 pages whereas, the applicant has been deprived of and only 106 pages have been provided to him.

5. He next submits that the trial court without providing the prosecution papers in compliance of section 207 of Cr.P.C., proceeded in the matter and fixed the date i.e. 16-12-2022 for framing of charges. He submits that the accused personns were not present or summoned from jail on that date and therefore, the matter has again been posted for 19-12-2022 for framing of charges.

6. He further contended that on 19-12-2022, the applicant moved a discharge application through his counsel before the trial court and thereafter, the trial court without considering the application of the discharge which was filed by the applicant under section 227 of Cr.P.C., proceeded to frame charges and thereafter, the charges have been framed on 19-12-2022 itself. He next added that though the counsel for the applicant was sitting inside of the court room, but, the court while sitting in his chamber, has passed the order and counsel for the applicant was not heard. In support of his contentions, he has drawn attention towards page no. 21 of the application wherein objection has been recorded by the counsel for the applicant on the same day.

7. He has further drawn attention of this court towards page 21 of the application itself i.e. an order passed by the trial court that "Sri Rama Shanker Dwivedi Ko Nyayamitra Niyukt Kiya Jata Hai." and submitted that neither there was any application moved on behalf of the accused nor the applicant was represented through his counsel for making any prayer for appointment of amicus curiae as is evident from the order itself. Thus, the order appointing an Amicus Curiae is also against the provisions of section 304 of Cr.P.C. Section 304 of Cr.P.C. is extracted hereinunder:-

"304. Where, in a trial before the Court of Sessi