Allahabad High Court
Smt. Seeba And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 13 March, 2023
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Narendra Kumar Johari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1508 of 2023
Petitioner :- Smt. Seeba And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sajjad Husain,Mohd Mateen
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Dharmendra Kumar Tripathi
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.
Heard Sri Sajjad Husain, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri D.S. Rana, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record. Sri Dharmendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the private respondent no. 5 is not present.
This petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the First Information Report dated 27.1.2023 registered as Case Crime/FIR No. 0045/2023 under Sections 363 I.P.C. at P.S. Pachperwa, District Balrampur and with a further prayer to issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite parties nos. 3 and 4 not to arrest the petitioners in pursuance to the impugned FIR and also to investigate the instant matter properly, fairly under the supervision of opposite party no. 2.
In compliance of the court's order dated 2.3.2023, the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre and as per the report of the mediation centre dated 3.3.2023, it appears that petitioner no. 1 had met with her mother respondent no. 5 on 2.3.2023 at 4:30 P.M.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the prosecutrix/petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.2 are major aged about 19 years and 26 years as per high school certificate and Certificate of Registration of Marriage respectively. There was love affair between the petitioner no.1 and 2 and they both have performed marriage on 8.2.2023 in Civil Court Compound, Kanpur Nagar, Kanpur, copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-3 to the writ petition. He next argued that the petitioner no.1 had voluntarily left her parental home and entered into matrimonial alliance with petitioner no.2 and that she was major, it cannot be said that any cognizable offence against the petitioner nos.1 and 2 is made out, hence the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that as the petitioner nos.1 and 2 are major and they have voluntarily married, then to conceive in view of the judgment of Apex Court rendered in Criminal Appeal No. 1142 of 2013 (Sachin Pawar vs. State of U.P) decided on 02.08.2013), that, offence has been committed under Section 366 I.P.C., cannot be approved of.
Per contra learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the respondent no. 5 opposed the prayer for quashing of the impugned FIR but could not dispute the fact that the victim/petitioner no. 1 is a major girl.
Learned AGA as well as Counsel for the respondent no.5 have not been able to demonstrate that either the prosecutrix Smt. Seeba was minor on the date of the incident or that she had been kidnapped or abducted by the petitioner no.2.
In view of the aforesaid, it cannot be said that the petitioner no.2 has committed any cognizable offence.
The writ petition accordingly succeeds and is allowed. The impugned FIR and all subsequent proceedings taken against the petitioners in pursuance thereof are hereby quashed.
There shall however be no order as to costs.
.
(Narendra Kumar Johari,J.) (Ramesh Sinha,J.)
Order Date :- 13.3.2023
AKK
