Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11238 of 2019 Petitioner :- Lalta Alias Lalita And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajendra Kumar Srivastava,Brijesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ifaqat Ali Khan,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned AGA for the State.
This writ petition has been filed for issuing a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned FIR registered as Case Crime No. 50 of 2019 u/s 366 IPC PS Barnahal District Mainpuri.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that victim is petitioner no.1 - and accused is petitioner no. 2; victim herself is the deponent of the affidavit filed in support of the present writ petition; the FIR shows that the girl was married to somebody else and she come back just 20 days before and thereafter she eloped with petitioner no.2 Rajnesh alias Dhansu; victim is aged about 21 years as per the FIR itself which has been lodged by the father of the girl, thus there is no question of disbelieving the FIR version.
Since the Court has been informed that the girl petitioner no. 1 is present before this Court today, with the consent of learned counsel for the both side, the Court by way of of abundant caution proceeds to examine her only to know as to whether she is the deponent of the affidavit or not.
Accordingly, the Court has examined petitioner no. 1, who has made a statement before this Court that her name is Lalita and her age is 21 years. Petitioner no. 1 also informed the Court that she has married with petitioner no. 2 Rajnesh @ Dhansu without any pressure, threat or coercion and they are entitled to live happily as husband and wife. She has informed the Court that earlier her parents forcibly got married her with somebody else, however she was not willing to perform the said marriage. She has further informed that she herself is the deponent of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. 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.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, keeping in view the statement made by the victim girl before this Court today 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, Shaheen Parveen and another v. State of U.P. And others passed in writ petition no. 3519 (M/B) of 2015, Basanti and another vs State of UP and others, passed in Misc. Bench No.18314 of 2016 (decided on 16.9.2016), Vinod Kumar vs State of UP and others passed in Misc. Bench No.28150 of 2016 (decided on 13.2.2017) 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 and in permitting the police authorities to harass the couple under the garb of fair investigation. It would be nothing but a sheer abuse of the process of law.
Accordingly, the writ petition stands allowed. The impugned FIR registered as Case Crime No. 50 of 2019 u/s 366 IPC PS Barnahal District Mainpuriis hereby quashed. Consequences to follow.
The family members of the victim girl as well as the person with whom the girl was married initially, they all are restrained from interfering in any manner whatsoever in the peaceful living of petitioner nos. 1 and 2 and indulging in any act of violence with them. In case they flout the order passed by this Court or indulge in any act of violence with the petitioners, they will be personally answerable to this Court.
Order Date :- 29.4.2019 SP