Allahabad High Court
Radha And Others vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home ... on 17 August, 2023
Bench: Shree Prakash Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:54647
Court No. - 28
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7094 of 2022
Applicant :- Radha And Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lko And Anr.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ramendra Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Awanish Kumar Upadhyay
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri B.N. Nishad, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Awanish Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the record.
By means of the instant application, the applicants have prayed for quashing of the entire proceedings of S.T. No.306 of 2015, charge sheet no.39 of 2015 and 1 of 2017, Case Crime No.9 of 2015 under Sections 363, 366, 368 I.P.C. and 7/8, 16/17 POCSO Act read with Section 376 I.P.C. and 5/6 and 16/17 POCSO Act, P.S. Hasanganj, District Lucknow, "State Vs. Bhai Lal Yadav and another" which is pending before Special Judge, POCSO Act, Court No.3, District Lucknow against the applicant nos.2 and 3.
Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that an F.I.R. was lodged on 10.1.2015 by the opposite party no.2, i.e., the brother of the applicant no. 1. He added that the Investigating Officer without collecting evidence has submitted the charge sheet, though the fact is otherwise that the applicant no.1 was never enticed away by the applicant no.2 and they being the major, performed marriage and there are three children from their wedlock as is mentioned in para 2 of the supplementary affidavit dated 2.8.2022. He added that the applicant no.2 as well as the alleged victim are living peacefully as husband and wife and there is no grudge against each other and if criminal proceedings is being allowed to go on, marital life of the applicant nos. 1 and 2 will be ruined. Further submits that due to annoyance, the F.I.R. has been lodged though no offence has been committed by the applicant no.2.
In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance on a judgment rendered in Vishwas Bhandari v. State of Punjab and another reported in (2021) 2 Supreme Court Cases 605, Criminal Appeal No.105 of 2021, dated 03.02.2021 and has placed reliance on paragraphs 9 and 10 and the same are extracted hereunder:-
"9. We find that the evidence of the prosecutrix and the complainant before the Court shows that there is no allegation whatsoever against the appellant. The main allegation was against Vikram Roop Rai but the prosecutrix married him on 4.8.2013 and had given birth to two children from that wedlock. In the absence of any allegation against the appellant, we find that the continuation of proceedings against him is nothing but an abuse of process of law.
10. Since there is no evidence against the appellant, the proceedings initiated against him on the basis of FIR would be untenable. The High Court was, thus, not justified in dismissing the petition against the appellant."
Referring the aforesaid, he submits that the case of the present applicants is squarely covered with the ratio of the Judgment aforesaid, as such, the criminal proceedings against the applicants may be quashed.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has submitted on the basis of instructions that he has lodged the F.I.R. under certain misconception and his sister has performed marriage with the applicant no.2 and they are living as husband and wife and, thus, the criminal proceeding against the applicants may be dropped.
On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State though has opposed the contention aforesaid but he has no objection if the applicant nos. 1 and 2 have performed marriage and there are three children from their wedlock.
Considering the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, it transpires that the F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant nos. 2 and 3 for enticing away the alleged victim, i.e., applicant no.1 from the lawful guardianship of her parents and charge sheet has been filed. It is borne out from the record that the applicant nos. 1 and 2 have performed marriage and there are three children from their wedlock, which has been specifically mentioned in para 2 of the supplementary affidavit.
This Court has further noticed the fact that since the alleged victim and the applicant no.2 have performed marriage, as such, no fruitful purpose would be served by allowing further criminal proceedings against them and further the case of the applicants is covered with the ratio of the judgment rendered in Vishwas Bhandari (supra).
Resultantly, criminal proceedings of S.T. No.306 of 2015 "State Vs. Bhai Lal Yadav and another" arising out of Case Crime No.9 of 2015 under Sections 363, 366, 368 I.P.C. and 7/8, 16/17 POCSO Act read with Section 376 I.P.C. and 5/6 and 16/17 POCSO Act, P.S. Hasanganj, District Lucknow, which is pending before Special Judge, POCSO Act, Court No.3, District Lucknow, are hereby quashed.
Consequences shall be followed.
The application is allowed accordingly.
Order Date :- 17.8.2023
Ram Murti
