Court No. - 67
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2286 of 2019
Applicant :- Pravesh Kumar @ Ravindra Chandel Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Sengar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Ms. Manju Savita, Advocate, has filed her vakalatnama as well as counter affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite party nos. 2 and 3, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.
By means of the instant application u/s 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant has made a prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Case No.34 of 2014 arising out of Case Crime No.3628 of 2013 (State of U.P. Vs. Pravesh @ Ravindra), u/s 323, 363, 366, 376, 506 IPC, Section 3/4 POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 3(2)V of the Scheduled Casts and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, P.S. Kotwali-Orai, District Jalaun, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st, Jalaun at Orai.
Submission made by the counsel for the opposite party no. 2 that the belated FIR was got registered on 19.12.2013 by the father of the girl. Thereafter, the statement of the victim was recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. On 10.12.2018 in which she has candidly stated that she has a love affair with the applicant and she has got married with him. Thereafter, she went to Jhansi and Delhi along with the applicant and now she is on the family way.
In order to quash the petition, the counsel for the applicant has submitted that the victim has got married with the applicant on 09.01.2013 and not only this, she has given birth to a baby on 07.11.2018. The birth certificate is annexed as annexure-5 to the petition. The learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the latest citation of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Suhani and another v. State of U.P. and others decided on 26th April, 2018 passed in Civil Appeal No.4532 of 2018 (arising out of SLP (C) No.8001 of 2018 to buttress his contention.
Keeping in view that the opposite no. 3 is presently residing with the applicant and both the parties has comes to terms. The compromise deed is annexed as Annexure- 1 to the counter affidavit.
Considering the fact that the applicant and opposite party no. 3 are residing happily as a married couple, I do not find any good reason to keep this matter pending.
In the light of the latest judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Suhani and another v. State of U.P. and others, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is, accordingly, allowed. The proceedings of Case No. 34 of 2014 arising out of Case Crime No. 3628 of 2013 (State of U.P. Vs. Pravesh @ Ravindra), u/s 323, 363, 366, 376, 506 IPC, Section 3/4 POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 3(2)V of the Scheduled Casts and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, P.S. Kotwali-Orai, District Jalaun, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge 1st, Jalaun at Orai is hereby quashed.
Order Date :- 21.1.2019 Nisha