Allahabad High Court
Raj Karan Singh @ Malik Singh vs State Of U.P. And Anr. on 23 February, 2023
Bench: Shree Prakash Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 27
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 809 of 2016
Applicant :- Raj Karan Singh @ Malik Singh
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
Counsel for Applicant :- R.A. Khan,Abdul Alim Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the record.
The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the impugned charge sheet as well as further proceeding of Case No.18/15, State Vs. Raj Karan Singh @ Malik Singh, arising out of Case Crime No.814 of 2014 under Section 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. & 3/4 POCSO Act at Police Station Kotwali City Gonda, District Gonda pending before the Additional Sessions Judge V, Gonda, District Gonda.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the instant matter. He next added that in fact, the applicant was never involved in committing any offence. The victim has performed marriage with the applicant in the year 2014 and there is a child out of their wedlock. It seems that the F.I.R. was lodged by the father of the victim due to annoyance though she was major at the time of marriage and it is evident from the medical report itself. He next added that criminal proceedings against the applicant will turmoil marital life of the applicant and his wife, namely, Akriti, and, thus, with a view to settle a family dispute and to meet the ends of interest of justice, the criminal proceedings against the applicant may be quashed.
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 SCC 605 and has referred paragraphs 7, 8 & 9 and the same are extracted hereunder:-
"7. It is thereafter, the Appellant invoked the jurisdiction of the High Court for quashing of the FIR and subsequent proceedings, inter alia, on the ground that neither the prosecutrix nor the complainant have levelled an iota of allegation against the Appellant in respect of abduction of the prosecutrix. In fact, the prosecutrix married Vikram Roop Rai, the main Accused and had two children with him. Such Marriage was with the consent of their families. Since there is no shred of evidence against the appellant, therefore, continuation of proceedings against the Appellant would amount to abuse of process of law.
8. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties.
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 out of 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."
Referring the aforesaid Judgment, learned counsel for the applicant submits that case of the present applicant is fully covered with the ratio of the Judgment in the case of Vishwas Bhandari (supra).
Learned counsel for the State has very vehemently opposed contention aforesaid and submits that the prosecutrix was minor at the time of incident and, therefore, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant and he is not entitled to any relief but so far as the fact that the applicant and the victim have performed marriage and there is a child out of their wedlock and at this time, they are major, as such, he has no objection if the order is passed applying the ratio of Vishwas Bhandari (supra).
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusal of the record, it is evident that the applicant has performed marriage with the alleged victim in the year 2014 and there is a child out of their wedlock and they are living happily. Prima facie, it seems that due to annoyance of the father of the victim, the instant F.I.R. has been lodged wherein the applicant is named. The Apex Court in the case of Vishwas Bhandari (supra) has very categorically held that in case the applicant and the victim are living together and there is child out of their wedlock then further criminal proceedings against the applicant would be a futile exercise.
In view of the aforesaid submissions and discussions, entire criminal proceedings against the applicant in Case No.18/15, State Vs. Raj Karan Singh @ Malik Singh arising out of Case Crime No.814 of 2014 under Section 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. & 3/4 POCSO Act at Police Station Kotwali City Gonda, District Gonda pending before the Additional Sessions Judge V, Gonda, District Gonda, are hereby quashed.
Consequences to be followed.
In case the applicant is in jail, he shall be released forthwith.
The application is allowed accordingly.
Order Date :- 23.2.2023
Ram Murti
