Mohammad Altaf @ Aftab And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 21179 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 47
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 18891 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Mohammad Altaf @ Aftab And 3 Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Jeeshan Ahmad Siddiqui
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Kanhaiya Lal,Mohammed Iftekhar
 

 
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

Counter Affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 4 is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Mohd. Iftekhar Farooqui, learned for the respondent no. 4 and the learned AGA for the State respondents.

This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to quash the First Information Report dated 4.10.2022 registered as Case Crime No.0619 of 2022, under Sections 376, 504, 506, 323 IPC, Police Station Nawabganj, District Prayagraj. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioners in the aforesaid case.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as per the first information report, both sides were consenting parties and moreover, the first petitioner and the informant have solemnized the marriage / nikah on 25.11.2022 and at present they are living together as husband and wife. In this background, it is being claimed that no case is made out against the petitioners under Section 376 IPC and the first information report is liable to be quashed. Learned counsel for the petitioners in support of his submissions has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Sonu alias Subhash Kumar v. State of U.P. & Anr., AIR 2021 SC 1405 (para 11).

Learned counsel for the informant fairly states that so far as the the solemnization of marriage between the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.4 is concerned, the same has been accepted in paragraph 4 of the counter affidavit filed by him and has not disputed the factum of the claim set up by the petitioners. He further submits that he has no objection in case the first information report is quashed.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending for consideration and with the consent of the parties, the writ petition stands disposed of asking the informant / respondent no.4 to appear before the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate / Judicial Magistrate for recording the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and accordingly the I.O. concerned may proceed further in the matter in accordance with law but certainly taking into account the statement to be recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

For a period of two months, respondents are restrained to arrest the petitioners pursuant to the impugned FIR subject to cooperation in the on-going investigation.

Order Date :- 15.12.2022 / ss