Court No. - 46
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 24297 of 2019 Petitioner :- Neetu And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Raghvendra Tripathi,Atul Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State.
By means of the present writ petition, the petitioners have invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the FIR dated 08.10.2016, registered as Case Crime No. 976 of 2016, under Sections 363 & 366 I.P.C. Section 16 and 17 POCSO Act and Section 3(1) (D) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Madhuban, District- Mau.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has identified petitioner Nos. 1 & 2, namely, Smt. Neetu and Satendra Yadav, who are present before this Court. It is submitted that petitioner No. 1 Smt. Neetu (wife) has voluntarily performed marriage with petitioner No. 2 Satendra Yadav (husband) without any coercion, duress or undue influence according to Hindu customs and rites. It is further submitted that out of wedlock two children have born and they are living happy marital life. The statement of the petitioner no.1 has also been recorded on 16.11.2019 where she has stated that she is living happily with her husband and wants to live alongwith him. Despite the statement of the petitioner no.1 the police personnel are harassing the petitioner no.2 in pursuance of the F.I.R. lodged by the respondent no.4 who is the father of the petitioner no.1. It is further submitted that petitioner is major and now she is aged about 22 years. Hence, the impugned F.I.R. lodged on the basis of false allegations is liable to be quashed.
Per contra, learned AGA contended that the allegations made against the petitioners cannot be aborted at this stage. There is complicity of petitioner No.2 in the commission of the said crime. 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 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.
However, in the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioners, it is directed that the petitioner No.1 shall not be harassed in any manner and petitioner no.2 shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case till the submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., subject to the restraint that he shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear as and when called upon to assist in the investigation.
This writ petition is disposed of as above.
Order Date :- 28.11.2019 Ashok Gupta