Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 34382 of 2018 Petitioner :- Boby @ Vimal Kumar And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Hans Nath Pandey,Ghanshyam Das Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.
Heard counsel for the petitioners, Sri Durgesh Pandey, Advocate who has put in appearance on behalf of respondent no. 4 and the learned AGA for the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that victim is petitioner no.2 - and accused is petitioner no. 1; both are major and have also solemnized their marriage and they are living happily as husband and wife; there is a joint affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. He further informed the Court that both the petitioners are present before this Court today.
Smt. Khashabu - petitioner no. 2 is present before this Court today and she has identified petitioner no. 1 who is also present before this Court today, as her husband, who in turn identified petitioner no. 2 as his wife.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has identified both the petitioners on the basis of documents produced before him in his chamber as a counsel.
Since petitioner no. 2 is present before this Court today, with the consent of learned counsel for the both side, the Court proceeds to examine her.
On being asked from petitioner no. 2 as to what is her name, she informs that her name is Khashabu and his father name is Dinesh Kumar Sharma, further she informed the court ki maine shadi bobi @ vimal kumar se apni marzi se ki hai. She further contends that no offence as alleged in the FIR has been made out, however, the police under the garb of investigation is unnecessarily harassing the petitioners.
The Court has been further informed that Dinesh Kumar Sharma- respondent no. 4 is also present in person. The Court further examine Dinesh Kumar Sharma with regard to the quashing of the first information report which has been lodged by him.
On being asked from respondent no. 4 that ye FIR aap ne hi karayi thi, he replied maine hi karayi thi. On being further asked ab aap kya chahte hai, he made a statement that ki mujhe ab is mukadme ko aage nhi chalana is case ko khatam karna hai. On being further asked that kya ye FIR quash kar dein to which he replied that haan FIR quash kar dijiye.
The counsel for respondent no. 4 has also made a statement at the bar that the parties have entered into a compromise and no dispute is pending as on date.
In view of the facts and circumstances and keeping in view the law as laid down in the case of Sachin Pawar v. State of U.P. Passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1142 of 2013 decided on 2.8.2013 and the law as laid down by the Division Bench of this Court at Lucknow Bench in the case of Vishal Jaiswal and another v. State of U.P. and others passed on 26.8.2016 in Misc. Bench No. 10724 of 2016 and Shaheen Parveen and another v. State of U.P. And others passed in writ petition no. 3519 (M/B) of 2015 and by the Apex Court in the cases of Lata Singh v. State of U.P. And another; 2011(6) SCC 396 and Shakti Vahini v. Union of India passed in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 231 of 2010, no purpose would be served in permitting the investigation to continue in pursuance of impugned FIR. It would be nothing but a sheer abuse of the process of law.
Accordingly, the writ petition stands allowed. The impugned FIR dated 30.7.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 346 of 2018, under Sections 452, 376, 323, 506, 120B I.P.C. and section 3A/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Surir, District Mathura is hereby quashed. Consequences to follow.
The girl Khashabu is hereby set at liberty forthwith and she is permitted to go wherever and with whomsoever she wants to go. Since the girl has expressed her desire to go with her husband, Boby, accordingly she is permitted to go with her husband and no hindrance will be placed in her movement.
Order Date :- 29.11.2018 sweta