Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 15071 of 2019 Petitioner :- Pooja Devi And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mahendra Prakash Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rajesh Mishra, learned AGA appearing for the State.
The contention of the counsel for the petitioners is that the victim herself is the petitioner no.1 and the accused is petitioner no.2' that they have filed a joint affidavit in support of the present writ petition seeking quashing of the impugned FIR dated 17.4.2019; that the impugned FIR has been lodged by the father of the girl in which the girl is aged about 19 years; photocopy of the marriage certificate is annexed at page 30 of the writ petition; that there is no reason to disbelieve the age of the girl as mentioned in the FIR, Kutumb register as well as marriage certificate; that both the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are adult and have solemnized their marriage of her own sweet will, without any fear threat or coercion and at present leaving happily as husband and wife.
The Court has been informed that the girl/petitioner no.1 is present before the Court, thus the Court proceeded to examine the girl, only for the purposes of verifying as to whether she is a signatory to the said affidavit, as a deponent or not, which has been filed in support of the present writ petition and also to verifying her age. On being asked ki ^^vkidk uke D;k gS**] she informed the Court ki ^^esjk uke पूजा gS**A On being asked ki ^^अंकिकित dkSu gaS**] she informed the Court ki ^^अंकिकित esjs ifr gaS**A On being asked ki ^^D;k bl fjV fiVh'ku ds ,QhMsfcM ij vkids gLrk{kj gaS**] she informed the Court ki ^^gkaW bl fjV fiVh'ku ds ,QhMsfcM ij eSus gh gLrk{kj fd;k gS**A The counsel for the petitioner has shown the photocopy of Aadhar Card, in which the date of birth of the girl is mentioned as 02.01.200 which is annexed at page 26 of the writ petition. On being further asked ki ^^vkidh mez fdruh gaS**] she informed the Court ki ^^esjh mez 19 lky gS**A On being further asked ki ^^bl vnkyr esa vki viuh ethZ ls vkbZ gaS ;k vkidks dksbZ Mjk /kedk djds y;k gaS**] she informed the Court ki ^^bl vnkyr esa eS viuh ethZ ls vkbZ gwaW eq>s dksbZ Hkh Mjk /kedk djds ugh y;k gaS**A In view of the 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 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.
However, liberty is given that in case it is found that some facts has been concealed, in the present writ petition, the person concerned shall file a recall application before this Court to recall the present order.
The girl Pooja is present before the Court, being an adult is free as to wherever she wants to go and with whom she wants to marry and no hindrance in her free movement will be placed by any of the respondents.
The writ petition is accordingly stands, allowed. The FIR dated 17.4.2019, which has been registered as Case Crime No. 0349 of 2019, under Section 366, IPC, Police Station Sorao, District Prayagraj, is hereby quashed.
Order Date :- 29.5.2019 Puspendra