Allahabad High Court
Smt.Rekha Devi & Ors. vs State Of ... on 26 August, 2021
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Saroj Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 9
Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 18656 of 2021
Petitioner :- Smt.Rekha Devi & Ors.
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home,Lucknow & Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhagwati Prasad Nigam
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,S.C. Misra
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.
Heard Shri B.P. Nigam, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri S.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State/respondent nos.1 to 3 and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
Shri Rudra Pratap Pal, learned counsel, has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.4. He is directed to file his memo of appearance in the Registry during the course of the day. He states that Sri S.C. Misra, learned counsel for respondent no.4 is out of station.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners- Smt. Rekha Devi, Pushpendra @ Sintu (in F.I.R. name of petitioner no.2 is Anoop Kumar @ Sintu), Arab Singh, Jabar Singh, Akhilesh for the following reliefs:
"(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned First Information Report dated 14-08-2021 registered at Police Station Behtagokul, District Hardoi, as a Case Crime No.0407/2021, under Section 366 I.P.C., contained as Annexure No.1 to this writ petition in the interest of justice.
(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party no.2 and 3 not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance of the impugned First Information Report 14-08-2021 registered at Police Station- Behtagokul, District Hardoi, as a Case Crime No.0407/2021, under Section 366 I.P.C. contained as Annexure No.1 to this writ petition in the interest of justice.
(iii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party nos.2 to 4 not to interfere in the peaceful matrimonial life of the petitioner nos.1 and 2 in the interest of justice."
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the prosecutrix/petitioner no.1-Smt. Rekha Devi is a major girl aged about 23 years as per High School Certificate contained in Annexure No.3 to the writ petition, her date of birth is mentioned as 15.08.1998 whereas the age of petitioner No.2- Pushpendra @ Sintu is 28 years. There was love affair between the petitioner no. 1 and 2 and they both have performed marriage on 29.07.2021 at Arya Samaj Vadik Vivah Sanskar (Trust), Shakarpur, Delhi, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition. He further submits that the police personnel has unnecessarily harassed the petitioners in pursuance of the impugned F.I.R. He next argued that the petitioner no. 1 had voluntarily left her parental home and entered into matrimonial alliance with petitioner no. 2. He further contended that once they are major and they have voluntarily married, it cannot be said that any cognizable offence against the petitioners is made out, hence the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed. He further submits that as the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are major and they have voluntarily married, then to conceive in view of the judgment of Apex Court rendered in Criminal Appeal No. 1142 of 2013 (Sachin Pawar vs. State of U.P) decided on 02.08.2013), that, offence has been committed under Section 366 I.P.C., cannot be approved of.
Learned counsel appearing for private respondent, on the other hand, opposed the submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioners but could not dispute the fact that petitioner no.1 is a major girl.
Per contra learned A.G.A. submitted that the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed on the basis of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners.
Learned A.G.A. has not been able to demonstrate that either the prosecutrix was minor on the date of the incident or that she had been kidnapped or abducted by the petitioners, in view of the above it cannot be said that the petitioners have committed any cognizable offence.
Considering the submissions advanced by counsel for parties and considering the fact that victim/petitioner no.1 is a major girl, the writ petition accordingly succeeds and is allowed.
The impugned F.I.R. and all subsequent proceedings taken against the petitioners in pursuance thereof are hereby quashed.
There shall however be no order as to costs.
(Saroj Yadav, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 26.8.2021
Shubhankar
