Allahabad High Court
Ajay vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 21 August, 2023
Bench: Shree Prakash Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:55056
Court No. - 28
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8183 of 2023
Applicant :- Ajay
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ambrish Kumar Pandey,Rajesh Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Sri Kushendra Kumar Singh Rathaur, Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2 as well the alleged victim and the same is taken on record.
Heard Sri Ambrish Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Kushendra Kumar Singh Rathaur, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 as well as the alleged victim, Sri Anirudh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the material placed on record.
The instant application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash and set aside the impugned summoning order dated 08-10-2019 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge,Court No. 11, Lucknow, in Case Crime No. 254 of 2015, under sections 363,366 of I.P.C. and Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act, Police Station-Sadatganj, District-Lucknow and the chargesheet bearing its no. 141 of 2015, dated 07-10-2015 inre; Case Crime No. 254 of 2015, under sections 363,366 of I.P.C. and Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act, Police Station-Sadatganj, District-Lucknow.
Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter. He next added that due to annoyance, the first information report was lodged by the father of the alleged victim against the present applicant though there is no truthfulness in the allegations made therein. He added that the victim was 18 years of age at the time of the alleged incident and she, with her own sweet will, has performed the marriage with the present applicant and there are two children from their wedlock, one is aged about five years and other is aged about three years, which fact has been mentioned in paragraph no. 10 of the instant application. He submits that since the present applicant and the alleged victim are living as husband and wife, therefore, the criminal proceedings against the present applicant would be a futile exercise and that amounts to harassment of the applicant. He next added that even the complainant has also signed over the compromise deed and he does not want to disturb the peaceful marital life of his daughter as well as his son-in-law.
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 hereinunder:-
"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 applicant is squarely covered with the ratio of the Judgment aforesaid. Therefore, submission is that the criminal proceedings against the present applicant may be quashed.
On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2 as well as the alleged victim has supported the version of the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that daughter of the opposite party no. 2 has performed her marriage with the present applicant and they are living as husband and wife and there are two children from their wedlock and thus, no offence has been committed by the present applicant and there is no further grievance of the opposite party no. 2 with the present applicant and thus, the criminal proceedings against the present applicant may be dropped.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State though, has opposed the contentions aforesaid on merits, but, he has no objection if the present applicant and the opposite party no. 2 and the alleged victim have compromised their dispute and the applicant and the alleged victim have performed their marriage and they are living as husband and wife.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that initially, the first information report was lodged by the father of the victim under sections 363 & 366 of I.P.C. and Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act at Police Station-Sadatganj, District-Lucknow, but, thereafter, when the daughter of opposite party no. 2 and the applicant performed their marriage and it was found that they are living as husband and wife and there are two children from their wedlock, he entered into a compromise with the present applicant, which has been annexed as Annexure No. 10 to the instant application.
This court has also considered the fact that since the applicant and the alleged victim have performed their marriage and there are two children from their wedlock and they are living as husband and wife, therefore, the further criminal proceedings would amount to harassment and unsettling the marital life of the present applicant as well as the daughter of opposite party no. 2.
Resultantly, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of impugned summoning order dated 08-10-2019 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge,Court No. 11, Lucknow, in Case Crime No. 254 of 2015, under sections 363,366 of I.P.C. and Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act, Police Station-Sadatganj, District-Lucknow and the chargesheet bearing its no. 141 of 2015, dated 07-10-2015 inre; Case Crime No. 254 of 2015, under sections 363,366 of I.P.C. and Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act, Police Station-Sadatganj, District-Lucknow, are hereby quashed.
The application under section 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed.
Consequences shall be followed.
Consigned to record.
Order Date :- 21.8.2023
AKS
