Court No. - 46
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 17071 of 2019 Petitioner :- Smt. Luxmi And Antoher Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Yadav,Mahendra Pratap Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.
In pursuance of the order dated 20.6.2019, the petitioner no. 1, Smt. Luxmi, who has been identified by the learned counsel for the petitioners, is present before this Court. The report of the Chief Medical Officer, Prayagraj which has been received in a sealed cover, has been opened in Court. According to the report, the age of the petitioner no. 1 has been shown as 17 years. As per the X-ray report, the age of the petitioner no. 1 has been determined above 16 and below 18 years, thus the petitioner no. 1 is minor.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.A. on behalf of the State.
By means of the present writ petition, the the petitioners have invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the FIR dated 20.5.2018, Case Crime No. 570 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C., Police Station Phase III, District-Gautam Buddha Nagar.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioner no. 1 has performed marriage with the petitioner no.2 without any coercion, duress or undue influence according to Hindu Customs & Rites. The First Information Report has been lodged by the respondent no. 4 with frivolous allegations that the petitioner no. 2 has enticed away his daughter. It is further submitted that the petitioner no. 2 has been implicated in the present case only in order to cause sheer harassment at the behest of respondent no. 4. Hence the impugned F.I.R. on the basis of false allegations made in the first information report lodged by the respondent no. 4, who is father of the petitioner no.1 is liable to be quashed.
Per contra learned AGA contended that the allegations made against the petitioner no. 2 cannot be aborted at this stage. He is involved in the serious offence, hence does not deserve any indulgence.
Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case and also from the bald perusal of the FIR, prima facie cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner no. 2 at this stage hence there is no ground for interfering in the FIR, therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned FIR is refused.
In the light of above, the Investigating Officer is directed to move an application before the C.J.M. concerned for recording the statement of petitioner no.1 under Section 164 Cr.P.C., who shall record the same within a week. The investigating officer shall provide her full protection. She shall not be harassed in any manner during this period.
It is further directed that the petitioner no. 2 shall not be arrested in the aforesaid crime till the submission of the report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C, subject to restraint that he shall cooperate with the investigation.
The respondent no. 4 is directed to take his daughter, petitioner no. 1, with an undertaking that she will not be harassed in any manner.
This writ petition is disposed of as above.
Order Date :- 25.6.2019 SR