At the discharge stage, the court must evaluate prosecution evidence to determine if a prima facie case exists without considering the defense's arguments or evidence.

JUDGMENT :

Manju Rani Chauhan, J.

1. Heard Mr. Rama Shankar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Amrendra Nath Singh, Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Pandey Balkrishna, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The present application has been filed assailing the order dated 05.09.2024 vide which the discharge application has been rejected as well as the entire proceedings of the case.

3. Brief facts of the case are that an FIR was lodged on 15.01.2022 by the opposite party no.2-Sonal Jain against four persons including the applicant with the allegations that marriage of opposite party no.2 was solemnized with Vishal Jain (brother of the applicant) according to Hindu Rites and Rituals on 21.11.2019. It is further alleged that the father of opposite party no.2 had given gifts and dowry as per his capacity, details about which have been mentioned in the FIR. All the named accused being Vishal Jain - husband, Ashok Jain - father-in-law, Kiran Jain - mother-in-law as well as the devar Vaibhav Jain/applicant, mentally and physically tortured the opposite party no.2 raising additional dowry demand. Details about sexual harassment by the husband, father-in-law and the applicant have been mentioned in the FIR. The mother-in-law of opposite party no.2 also supported the aforesaid persons when they mentally, physically and sexually harassed the opposite party no.2. After investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted on 25.01.2023 against the applicant under Sections 498-A, 376, 323, 354 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act in which the court has taken cognizance on 31.01.2023.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is delay in lodging the FIR without giving any plausible explanation for the same. The FIR has been lodged with false and frivolous allegations due to ulterior motive. He further submits that the story as narrated in the FIR as well as the statement of the victim as recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C . appears to be highly improbable as it is not possible for the applicant along with his father and elder brother to do such an act together on the same date and time as has been stated. He further contends that there are contradictions in the version of the FIR as well as statement of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C .

5. It has been further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the victim has refused to get herself internally medically examined; therefore, there is no evidence to prove that she was sexually harassed by the applicant. The allegations in the FIR as well as statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C . thus, cannot be corroborated by any medical. The statements of parents of the victim have been recorded and as the father of the victim is politically strong person, therefore, the police authorities being influenced by him, have submitted the charge sheet without conducting any proper investigation. The Investigating Officer has not collected any credible evidence to prove any such allegations as made by the opposite party no.2 in the FIR as well as statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C . The applicant has already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 21.03.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.57069 of 2022 (Vaibhav Jain vs. State of U.P.). Taking all the aforesaid grounds, discharge application has been moved by the applicant on 12.08.2024 and the same has been rejected on 05.09.2024 without application of judicial mind not considering the grounds as taken in the aforesaid application, therefore, the order dated 05.09.2024 may be set-aside and the proceeding may be quashed.

6. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State submit that there is no illegality in the order dated 05.09.2024 as, a detailed order has been passed considering the position of law where the contentions as raised by learned counsel for the