IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized the importance of evaluating the credibility of allegations and exercising inherent powers to prevent abuse of the legal process.

JUDGMENT :

1. Applicant- Anjali has filed this petition under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of Complaint No.02 of 2023, titled Ruksana Vs. Jasveer and others, under Sections 376D, 120B, 504, 506 I.P.C. and u/s 66 Information Technology Act, 2000, as well as impugned summoning order dated 14.02.2023 passed by Special Judge (POCSO Act), Mathura.

2. Briefly, the facts leading to the application are that the complainant, namely, Ruksana w/o Amajad Khan brought a criminal complaint bearing number 02 of 2023, titled Ruksana Vs. Jasveer and others, before the Special Court (POCSO Act), Mathura with the allegations that she is working as maid in Flat No.223, Krishna Kaishan, Omex Triniti, Police Station- Vrindavan, District- Mathura, where her 11 years old daughter is also residing. On 03rd January, 2023, at around 7.00 p.m., Jasveer s/o Rajendra, r/o House No.170, Post- Firozpur, Police Station- Khurza Nagar, District Bulandshahr, along with Lalit s/o Harghyan Singh, r/o Badshahpur, Siroli, Police Station Loni, District Ghaziabad, Harish Kumar s/o Daljeet Singh, r/o House No.32 Part 2, M.B. Road, Shadulljav, New Delhi and Anjali, w/o Jitendra, r/o Bahadurpur, Police Station- Parishitgarh, District Meerut came to meet her in the said flat. The complainant already knew the visitors, therefore, she did not suspect anything, who on the asking of accused Anjali went out to bring milk for preparing tea and eatables. The complainant returned at 07.30 p.m., and saw that accused- Jasveer had pulled down the bottoms (Salwar) of her daughter and was putting his fingers in her private parts, whereas accused Lalit was molesting her daughter. As per allegations accused Anjali and Harish Kumar were collectively preparing video and when complainant raised alarm, accused Anjali threatened to viral the video on internet and also abused her. The complainant saved her daughter from all the four accused persons, who while fleeing away from the spot gave threats to her. The complainant went to the police station-Vrindawan, Mathura for giving the complaint, but she was not heard, and even the Superintendent of Police, Mathura did not hear her. The complainant prayed that the accused be summoned and punished for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 452, 376D, 354, 504, 506 IPC, 5/6 POCSO Act and Section 67-A Information Technology Act, 2000.

3. The complaint is supported with an affidavit dated 03.02.2023 of the complainant, and further in support of the case her statement under Section 200 Code of Criminal Procedure was also recorded. Apart from this, the statement of the victim was also recorded on 6th February, 2023 as P.W.1, and upon considering the contents of the complaint and pre- summoning evidence, the trial court proceeded to issue process against the accused persons vide impugned summoning order dated 14th February, 2023. Hence, this petition.

4. On 1st December, 2023, this Court had passed the following order:

"1. Second supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA.

3. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the summoning order dated 14.02.2023 as well as the entire proceedings of Complaint No. 02 of 2023 (Ruksana Vs. Jasveer and others), under Sections- 376D, 120B, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 66 I.T. Act, Police Station- Vrindavan, District-Mathura, pending in the court of Additional Session/ Special Judge (POCSO Act), Mathura.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that earlier applicant has lodged FIR against one Rajeev Gupta and Pradeep Mittal in which they have been arrested and later on enlarged on bail on 19.10.2022. He next submitted that after enlargement on bail, they have implanted a lady, namely, Ruksana- opposite party no. 2 for filing frivolous complaint against the applicant and three other persons, namely, Jasveer, Lalit and Harish, who are not known to applicant. He next submitted that applicant has give