IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.824 of 2026 ------

Md. Warish Ansari @ Warish Ansari, aged about 32 years, Son of Md. Moin Ansari, Resident of Lal Bazar, P.O.-Khori Mahua, P.S.-

Dhanwar, Dist.-Giridih.

… Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------

For the Petitioner : Md. Razaullah Ansari, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manoj Kr. Mishra, Addl.P.P.

------

P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY By the Court:- Heard the parties.

2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 with the prayer to quash and set aside the order dated 27.05.2025 by which the cognizance of the offences has been taken by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Giridih, but it has not been mentioned that in connection of which case the order dated 27.05.2025 has been passed. A further prayer has also been made to quash and set aside the entire criminal proceeding in connection with S.T. Case No.322 of 2025 arising out of Sariya P.S. Case No.233 of 2024 including the order dated 11.08.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-V, Giridih whereby and where under the learned Additional Sessions Judge-V, Giridih has framed charges for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n) & 313 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner on 06.06.2023 at Village Balidih at the house of the victim and also at Visakhapatnam on subsequent dates repeatedly committed rape upon the informant/victim by obtaining her consent with the false promise of marriage and thereby committed the offences punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code. There is further allegation against the petitioner that on 14.12.2023 at hospital on Konka Road, Ranchi, voluntarily caused the victim with child to miscarriage without her consent and such miscarriage was not being done in good faith for the purpose of saving the life of the victim and thereby committed the offence punishable under Section 313 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence and the victim girl is a married lady. The allegation against the petitioner is false, hence, it is lastly submitted that the prayer as prayed for by the petitioner in this Cr.M.P., be allowed.

5. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner made in the instant Cr.M.P and submits that the only contention of the petitioner is that the allegation against the petitioner are false, which is the defence of the petitioner, which cannot be considered by this Court in exercise of the power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023. It is next submitted that there is overwhelming evidence in the record to bring home both the charges, which have been framed against the petitioner. Therefore, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed so that the trial court may take a call on the contention of the petitioner.

6. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that it is a settled principle of law that the defence of the accused person of the case and the veracity of the evidence put forth by the accused person, cannot be considered by the High Court, in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023, as that would be the job of the trial court, as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Awadh Kishore Gupta & Ors. reported in (2004) 2 Supreme 501

7. It is also a settled principle of law as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. vs. Akhil Sharda & Ors. reported in 2022 LiveLaw SC 594 that no mini trial can be