Allahabad High Court
Mahendra Singh @ Mahendra Pratap ... vs The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. ... on 22 August, 2023
Bench: Shree Prakash Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:55869
Court No. - 28
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8288 of 2023
Applicant :- Mahendra Singh @ Mahendra Pratap Singh @ Golu
Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Civil Sectt. Lko. And Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dharmendra Pratap Singh
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
1. Sri Dharmendra Pratap Singh, advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 3 and the same is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Girijesh Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the State, Sri Dharmendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 3 and perused the record.
3. Instant application has been filed with prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings of State Versus Mahendra Singh @ Mahendra Pratap Singh @ Golu, arising out of Case Crime no. 103/2016, under sections-363/366/354B/376 I.P.C. and 3/4/7/8 POCSO Act. relating to Police Station Rudauli, District- Faizabad/Ayodhya, pending in the court of Learned Additional Session Judge POCSO Act III, Faizabad as well as impugned Chargesheet dated 10/11/2016 as well as impugned summoning/cognizance order dated 10/11/2016.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that an FIR was lodged on 16.03.2016 against the applicant under section 363, 366 of IPC and 16/17 of POCSO Act, which was registered as Case Crime No. 103 of 2016 at Police Station- Rudauli, District- Faizabad/Ayodhya. He added that the Investigating Officer has ignored the statement of alleged victim submitted the chargesheet. He further argued that the FIR was lodged by father of the alleged victim due to annoyance and the victim under duress has stated against the applicant in her statement under section 164 of Cr.P.C. He next added that in fact the applicant and the alleged victim performed the marriage and they are living as husband and wife and they have one male child from their wedlock. He has drawn attention towards birth certificate issued by Registrar (Birth and Death) annexed as annexure no. 6 to this application. He next submits that since the applicant and the alleged victim are living as husband and wife, peacefully and allowing further the criminal proceedings would ruin the marital life of the applicant as well as the alleged victim. Thus, submission is that the criminal proceedings against the applicant may be quashed.
5. In support of his contention he has also placed reliance on judgment rendered in case of 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 submits that the case of the present applicant is squarely covered in the ratio of the judgment above-said. Therefore, submission is that the criminal proceedings against the present applicant may be quashed.
6. Learned counsel for opposite party no. 3 has also supported the version of counsel for the applicant and submits that opposite party no.3 has performed the marriage with the present applicant and she is living as wife with the applicant and therefore, the criminal proceedings against the applicant may be dropped.
7. Learned counsel for the State though has opposed the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, but he has no objection if the applicant and the alleged victim have performed marriage and they are living as husband and wife.
8. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that initially an FIR was lodged by opposite party no. 2 against the applicant and thereafter, the statement of the victim was recorded under section 161 of Cr.P.C., which demolishes the story of the prosecution, though, it has further been averted that the statement of the alleged victim was recorded under section 164 of Cr.P.C. under duress which goes against the applicant.
9. This Court has noticed the fact that the record shows that the present applicant and opposite party no. 3 have performed marriage and there is a child from their wedlock, as birth certificate has been annexed along with application. This Court has also considered that since the present applicant and the alleged victim have performed marriage and they have a child from their wedlock, therefore, the case of the present applicant is squarely covered with ratio of judgment of Vishwas Bhandari v. State of Punjab and another (Supra).
10. In view of the aforesaid submissions and discussions, criminal proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 103 of 2016, under sections-363, 366, 354B, 376 I.P.C. and 3/4/7/8 POCSO Act relating to Police Station Rudauli, District- Faizabad/Ayodhya are hereby quashed.
11. Consequences to be followed.
12. The application is allowed accordingly.
13. Consigned to record.
Order Date :- 22.8.2023
Mayank
