Allahabad High Court
Kamruddin And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of ... on 12 March, 2025
Author: Saurabh Lavania
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:15045
Court No. - 12
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1736 of 2025
Applicant :- Kamruddin And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Amar Nath Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
1. Vakalatnama filed by Mr. Anil Kumar Yadav, Advocate on behalf of opposite party no. 2/informant in Court today is taken on record.
2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
3. The present application has been filed by the applicants seeking the following main relief:-
"to quash the criminal proceeding of Criminal Misc. Case No. 27264/2022, arising out of charge sheet dated 3.4.2022 as well as impugned summoning order dated 15.4.2022 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow pertaining to case crime No. 0074/2020, under Sections-323, 366, 376 I.P.C. Police Station-Gomtinagar,, District-Lucknow State of U.P. Versus Kamruddin and further it may be pleased to stay the criminal proceeding of Criminal Misc. Case No. 27264/2022, arising out of charge sheet dated 3.4.2022 as well as impugned summoning order dated 15.4.2022 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow pertaining to case crime No. 0074/2020, under Sections-323, 366, 376 I.P.C. Police Station-Gomtinagar, District-Lucknow State of U.P. Versus Kamruddin, in the interest of justice."
4. It is stated that applicant no.1 and applicant no. 2 (hereinafter referred to as "victim") were in affair and victim was inclined to marry with applicant no. 1 and both were known to each other as applicant no. 1 is the son of aunt (????) of the victim. The relationship of victim and applicant no.1 initially was not acknowledged/accepted by the opposite party no.2/father of the victim.
5. It is also stated that due to some reasons the applicant no. 1 could not solemnize marriage with the victim and therefore an FIR No. 0074 of 2020, under Sections 323, 363, 376, 313 IPC was lodged by opposite party no. 2 against the applicant no.1 and others namely Sujauddin, Shahista Parveen, Saida Parveen and Dr. Pushpa Jaiswal. The FIR reads as under :
"??? ????? ?????? ???? ?????????- ???? ??? ???????? ?????????? / ??????? ????- ????????, ???? ?????, ??? ???????? ???? ???? ????? ??? ???? ?????? 32 ??, ??.??. ?? ???? ??? ?????? ?? ?? ?? ??????? ??? ??? ??????? ??? - 561/21, ?????? ??????, ?????? ??? ???? ??????? ????? ?? ??? ???? ???????? ?? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ???? 22 ???? ?? ?? ??. ??.??. ?? ?????????? (????? ?? ???) ???????? ?????? ??????? ?????, ???????? ??????, ???????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ??? ??? 20.09.2019 ?? ???? ?????? ?????? ?? ?? ???? ??????, ?? ???? ? ???? ?????? ?????? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ?? ???, ??? ???? ?????? ??? ????, ???? ?????? ???? ???????? ?????? ???? ???????? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ?? ???????? ??? 23.09.2019 ?? ???? ????? ???? ??? ????? ??? ??? ?????? ??? 10.10.2019 ?? ???? ?????? ?????? ?????? ??? ? ???? ??? ? ???? ??? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??? ?? ???? ???????? (????) ?? ??-???? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?? ???? ??? ?????? ?? ??? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ??? ??? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ??? ?? ???? ????????? ???? ?? ?? ?? ???? ???? ?? ????? ?? ????? ??? ??? ????? ??? ?? ???? ????????? ?? ???? ???? ??? ?????? ?? ????? ??? ????? ?? ????, ???? ????? ?? ??? ???? ?? ?? ????? ?? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ? ?? ???? ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ????????? ?? ???? ???? ?? ????? ??? ???????? ???? ???? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??? ?? ????? ??? ????, ????? ??? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??? ???? ?? ??? ?? ???? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ????? ?? ??? ??????? ???? ?? ?? ??? ??? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ?????????? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?? ???? ??? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ??? ??? ??? ????????? ?? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ?????????? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??? ??? ???? ???, ?? ??? ???? ??? ????? ???? ?? ???? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?? ??? ??? ????? ??? ?? ???? ??? ??????? ????? ? ???? ??? ????? ???? ???? ????? ????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ?? ??? ????????? ?? ???? ????? ????? ??? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ????? ?? ???? ?? ?? ? ????? ?? ??? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ?? ???? ???? ??? ?????? ??? ?? ?? ?? ??? ??? ?????? ?? ?? ????? ???? ????? ?? ??? ?????? ??? ???? ?????? ?? ?? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ?? ???? ??? ???? ???? ?? ?? ???? ??? ???? ?? ???? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ???????? ?? ??????? ???????? ?? ?????? ?? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ????? ?? ?? ??? ?????? ??? ???? ?? ?? ????????? ????? ??? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???? ????? ???? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ??? 19.06.2019 ?? ???? ?? ???? ??? ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????????? ? ???? ???? ?? ??? ??? ????????? ???? ?? ????? ???? ???? ???? ??? ?? ???? ???? ??? ????? ?????? ?????? ???? ??? ??? ??? ???? ?? ???? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ?????? ??????? ? ?????? ??? ?? ????????? ???? ??? ?? ???? ?? ???? ?? ??? ? ?????? ??? ????? ???? ?? ?????, ???? ?? ??????? ?? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ?? ??? 26.06.2019 ?? ???? ???? ??? ??? ?? ???? ??? ??????? ??? ???? ??? ????? ???? ?? ????? ???????? ?? ?????? ?? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ???????? ?? ?????? ?? ?? ???? ?? ????????? ??????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ?? ?? ?? ????? ?? ???? ??? ?? ??? ?????????? ??? ?? ? ???? ???? ?? ????????? ? ???? ??? ???????? ???????? ?? ?? ?????? ?????? ??????? ????? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ?? ???? ??????? ??? ????, ?? ????? ?? ???? ????? ?? ??? ?? ???? ??? ????????? ? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ? ???? ???????? ?????? ?? ??? ??? ??????? ?? ?? ???? ????????? ?? ?? ???? ??? ???? ????? ???? ??? ??????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??? ?????? ? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ????? ????? ???????- ?? ???? ???? ???????? (???? ????) ????? ??? ???? ??0-32 ?? ??????, ??.??.??. ???? Mo-9450832082, 8808866056 HM/CM ?????? ?????? ??? ?????? ?????? ????? ?? ??????? ?????? 10/1/2020 ????- ????? ??0. 4177 ????? ???? ???? ???????? ???? ?????? 11/01/2020 ?????? ?? ???? "
6. The FIR, quoted above, indicates that the victim was aged about twenty two-years, and it was lodged as the applicant no. 1 could not solemnize marriage with the victim.
7. It is further stated that Investigating Officer, after due investigation, submitted the charge-sheet against the applicant no. 1 under Sections 323, 376, 366 IPC.
8. It is further stated that marriage of the applicant no.1 and the victim was solemnized on 16.03.2022 and this fact is evident from Annexure No. 10 (Copy of wedding card), Annexure No. 11 (Copy of nikah along with Aadhaar card of the applicants), Annexure No. 12 (Copy of photographs), Annexure No. 13 (Copy of marriage certificate dated 29.06.2022 and Annexure No. 17 (Copies of passport and visa).
9. It is also stated that in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, indulgence of this Court is required in the matter, as otherwise, entire matrimonial life of applicant no.1 and victim would be ruined.
10. Learned counsel for the informant/opposite party no.2 has stated that the informant/opposite party no.2 has accepted the relationship of the applicant no.1 and the victim (daughter of the informant) and does not want to continue with the criminal proceedings.
11. Upon consideration of the aforesaid and the observations in relation to making physical relationship on the assurance of solemnizing marriage made by the judgment(s) of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Deepak Gulati vs. State of Haryana (2013) 7 SCC 675; Sonu @ Subhash Kumar vs. State of U.P. and Another (2021) 7 SCC; and Mandar Deepak Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and Another 2022 SCC OnLine SC 2110 as also the observations made in the judgements passed in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. L. Muniswamy and Others, 1977 (2) SCC 699; State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335; Prashant Bharti Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2013) 9 SCC 293; Rajiv Thapar and Ors. Vs. Madan Lal Kapoor, (2013) 3 SCC 330; Ahmad Ali Quraishi and Ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. (2020) 13 SCC 435, according to which, inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (akin to Section 528 BNSS, 2023) could be exercised to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure ends of justice, and also the observations made by Apex Court in the case of Ramgopal and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2022) 14 SCC 531, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [2012 10 SCC 303], Mohd. Ibrahim Vs. State of U.P., 2022 SCC Online ALL 106, Gold Quest International Ltd. Vs. State of Tamilnadu, 2014 (15) SCC 235, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, 2003 (4) SCC 675, Jitendra Raghuvanshi Vs. Babita Raghuvanshi, 2013(4) SCC 58, Madhavarao Jiwajirao Scindia Vs. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre, 1988 1 SCC 692, Nikhil Merchant Vs. C.B.I. and another, 2008(9) SCC 677, Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, 2008(16) SCC 1, State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, 2019(5) SCC 688, Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Manoj Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P and others (2008) 8 SCC 781, Union Carbide Corporation and others Vs. Union of India and others (1991) 4 SCC 584, Manohar Lal Sharma Vs. Principal Secretary and others (2014) 2 SCC 532 and Supreme Court Bar Association Vs. Union of India (1998) 4 SCC 409, according to which, in given facts, based upon the settlements between the parties the criminal proceedings can be quashed, this Court is of the view that entire criminal criminal proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 0074/2020, quoted above, are liable to be quashed. Accordingly are hereby quashed.
12. Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 12.3.2025
Mohit Singh/-
