Antima And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 9815 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 1
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5745 of 2022
 
Petitioner :- Antima And Another
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko And Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vyas Narayan Shukla,Shiv Kumar Soni
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.

Heard Shri Shiv Kumar Soni, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Balram Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State/respondent nos.1, 2 and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners- Antima and Nitesh Kumar Yadav with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned F.I.R. dated 31.07.2021 lodged by complainant/respondent no.3 registered as Case Crime/F.I.R. No.0243 of 2022, under Section 366 I.P.C., Police Station Baldirai, District Sultanpur with a further prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents, not to arrest the petitioner no.2 in pursuance of the impugned F.I.R.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits the age of petitioner no.1-Antima is about 22 years as is evident from the High School Examination Certificate-Cum-Marks Sheet contained in Annexure No.2 to the writ petition, her date of birth mentioned as 10.10.1999. She has voluntarily eloped with petitioner no. 2 and has also solemnized marriage with him on 27.07.2022 at Arya Samaj Mandir, Sector-H, Aliganj, Lucknow according to Hindu rites and rituals, a copy of the Marriage Certificate dated 27.07.2022 is annexed as Annexure No.4 to the writ petition and at present both of them are willing to live together as husband and wife. He further contended that once they 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.

Prima facie arguments advanced appear to have some substance and require consideration by this Court, therefore, a case for interim relief is made out.

Since Shri Balram Singh, learned A.G.A. has put in appearance on behalf of respondents no. 1, 2, hence no fresh notices need to be issued to them.

Issue notice to respondent no. 3. Steps be taken within ten days.

Let counter affidavit be filed within four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.

List thereafter.

Till the next date of listing or till submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., if any, before the competent Court, whichever is earlier, the arrest of the petitioner no.2- Nitesh Kumar Yadav in pursuance of the impugned F.I.R. shall remain stayed of course subject to the restraint that the petitioner no.2 shall fully cooperate with the investigation and shall appear as and when called upon to assist in the investigation.

(Mrs. Saroj Yadav, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)

Order Date :- 10.8.2022

Shubhankar