JUDGMENT : Heard Mr. Sah, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Sushma Aind, the learned State counsel. 2. Earlier notice was issued upon O.P.No.2 however notice has not been effected. 3. I.A. No.3437 of 2023 has been filed for amendment in the prayer portion praying therein that the discharge petition filed by the petitioner was rejected by the learned court by order dated 08.12.2022 and that is why this petition has been filed for amendment. 4. Considering the prayer made in the said I.A., the instant I.A. is allowed. Let this I.A. be treated as part of main petition. Thus, the order dated 8.12.2022 by which discharge petition was dismissed is also under challenge. 5. This petition has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding including order dated 18.11.2014 in Adityapur P.S.Case No.301 of 2014, G.R. No.885 of 2014, pending before learned Special Judge, SC/ST, Seraikella. 6. In view of allowing of the I.A petition the dismissal order of discharge petition is also under challenge. 7. The FIR is registered alleging there in that when the informant feeling weakness on 7.9.2014 she went to the clinic of Dr. Nawal Choudhary. When she told about her personal problem to Nawal Choudhary then he asked her to lie down on a bench and then he touched on her stomach and chest and also checked BP and told her BP was very low and hold her cheeks. On seeing this the informant got scared and tried to get up but he pushed her down and started to touch her body and she forcefully woke up and then he told her to sit beside her then he put his both hand on her things and the informant again scared and woke up and then he told not to worry as her husband is out and she will be all right if she stays for two to three hours and then he hugged her and then she got scared and pushed him back and she went out and he threatened her not to tell this to anyone or else she will be killed and she did not tell this to her nanad and straight away went to her sasural. 8. Police investigated the matter and submitted charge sheet and thereafter the learned court has been pleased to take cognizance. 9. Mr. 8. Police investigated the matter and submitted charge sheet and thereafter the learned court has been pleased to take cognizance. 9. Mr. Sah, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier compromise was there however, the O.P.No.2 was not appearing before the learned court. He submits that discharge petition is filed which was dismissed by order dated 08.12.2022. He submits that case is false in nature and entire criminal proceeding may kindly be quashed. 10. The learned State counsel submits that case has rightly been instituted and the cognizance has been taken and subsequently thereafter discharge petition is rejected and in that view of the matter at this stage, the case is made out. 11. In view of the above and looking into the order passed on discharge petition dated 8.12.2022 it appears that learned court has been pleased to take note of the fact that the court required to satisfy that for the accusation against the accused is not frivolous and there are materials against him and at the time of framing of charge the court has to see that there is sufficient ground and the order of discharge cannot be passed and the accused has to face the trial as has been held Rajvir Singh v. State of U.P. , reported in AIR 2006 SC 1963 . 12. In view of the above observation and nature of allegation the Court finds prima facie case against the petitioner and that is why he has dismissed the discharge petition. The case has already been investigated and the charge sheet has been submitted and cognizance has also been taken. The discharge petition is dismissed and such order is in accordance with law. No relief can be extended to the petitioner. 13. Accordingly, Cr.M.P. No.3020 of 2014 is dismissed. 14. Pending petition if any also stands dismissed accordingly.