JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Abhishek Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Shri Vijai Prakash Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State as well as perused the material available on record.

2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the impugned summoning order dated 31.5.2022 passed by/pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act) Bahraich in Complaint Case No. 97 of 2021 in Re:-Smt. Karima Vs. Aarif under Sections 452, 376 (AB), 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 5 (m)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (in short " the POCSO Act"), Police Station-Hardi, District-Bahraich as well as application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. dated 26.8.2021 vide complaint no. 97 of 2021 and further proceedings of the case in pursuance thereof.

3. Brief facts of the case is that the opposite party no 2 filed an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. on 26.8.2021 in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act) Bahraich. The application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. has been moved alleging that the opposite party no. 2 and the petitioner are relatives. Petitioner and his family members used to come at house of the opposite party no. 2. On 6.8.2021 at about 1:00 p.m. minor daughter of the opposite party no. 2, aged about 11 years was alone at the house. Petitioner entered into the house and started outraging modesty of her daughter, on objection, petitioner pushed her on earth, undressed her, and forcefully committed rape against her wishes and extended abuses and threat of life in case she told about the same to anywhere. When the opposite party no. 2 reached her house, then her daughter told the whole story to the opposite party no.2. Immediately, the opposite party no. 2 gave information at Police Station-Hardi on the same day but when no action was taken then on 11.8.2021 she gave an application to the Superintendent of Police, Bahraich through registered post, but till date no action has been taken. Then, the application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. has been moved then the trial court treated the application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. as a complaint case.

4. In the aforesaid complaint case, the statement of the complainant was recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. on 22.10.2021 (annexed as Annexure No. 4). The statement of the witnesses, namely, P.W.-1-Jakir and P.W.-2-Aarif were also got recorded under the provisions of Section 202 Cr.P.C. on 23.11.2021 and 17.12.2021 respectively. The statement of the P.W.-3 victim was also recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C. on 5.4.2022. On the basis of the statement recorded under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., the trial court passed the summoning order under Section 204 Cr.P.C. as aforesaid on 31.5.2022

5. Learned counsel for the applicant raises the preliminary objection that the POCSO Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. as a complaint case under Section 190 (1) (a) Cr.P.C., because the only option is available to the POCSO Court to direct the concerning police station to register and investigate the matter. He further submitted that the POCSO Court may pass the cognizance order and summoning order only on the basis of the investigation done by the Investigating Officer and the report submitted under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. He further submitted that in this regard in POCSO Act special procedure has also been mentioned under Section 19 of the POCSO Act. The procedure of Section 19 of the POCSO Act reads as under:-

"(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) any person (including the child), who has apprehension that an offence under this Act is likely to be committed or has knowledge that such an offence has been committed, he shall provide such information to,--

(a) the Special Juvenile Police Unit; or

(b) the local police.

(2)