Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Smt Rani Dixit And Others vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|13 September, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7359 of 2018 Petitioner :- Smt. Rani Dixit And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Narendra Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Kamlesh Kumar Tripathi
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Ravindra Nath Kakkar,J.
Counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit have been exchanged between the parties.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Seen the office report dated 12.9.2018. Service on respondent no. 3 is deemed to be sufficient in view of the provisions of Chapter VIII, Rule 12, Explanation (II) of the Allahabad High Court Rules.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 6.3.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 64 of 2018 u/s 363, 366, 506 I.P.C., P.S.- Kabrai, District- Mahoba.
Following order was passed by this Court on 27.3.2018 :-
"Heard Sri Narendra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Vikas Sahai, learned AGA for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
Learned A.G.A. has accepted notice on behalf of the opposite party nos. 1 and 2.
Issue notice to the opposite party no. 3.
Each of the respondent is granted four weeks time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may also be filed within two weeks thereafter. List after six weeks.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1 and 2 are major and they have also solemnized their marriage on 8.3.2018 as per Hindu customs. He further contended that once they are major and they have voluntarily married, then to conceive in view of the judgment of Apex Court rendered in Criminal Appeal No. 1142 of 2013 - Sachin Pawar Vs. State of U.P., decided on 02.08.2013, that, offence has been committed under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C., cannot be approved of.
Prima facie arguments advanced appear to have some substance and require consideration by this court as such pursuant to impugned F.I.R. dated 6.3.2018, registered as Case Crime No.64 of 2018, u/s 363, 366, 506 IPC, P.S. Kabrai, district Mahoba, no coercive action be taken against the petitioners.
It is made clear that if the petitioners do not take steps to serve notice to respondent no.3 within two weeks' from today, the interim protection granted above shall automatically vacated and this petition shall stand dismissed without further reference to any Bench of this Court."
In compliance of the order dated 5.9.2018, petitioner no. 1, Smt. Rani Dixit has been produced before us by petitioner no.2, her husband. On being questioned by the Court, she has stated that she is safe and happy with her husband, Abhishek Kumar Vyas, and she has no intention of returning to her paternal home and that she had solemnized marriage with petitioner no. 2, Abhishek Kumar Vyas voluntarily after leaving her parental home on her own accord.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in view of the above statement of petitioner no.1, it cannot be said that the petitioners have committed any cognizable offence and hence impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
Learned A.G.A. for the State has not disputed the fact that petitioner no. 1, Smt. Rani Dixit is major and she had solemnized marriage with petitioner no. 2. Abhishek Kumar Vyas voluntarily after leaving her parental home on her own accord.
After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the other material brought on record, we are of the opinion that since the petitioner no. 1, Smt. Rani Dixit was major on the date of occurrence and she had solemnized marriage with petitioner no. 2, Abhishek Kumar Vyas voluntarily after leaving her parental home on her own accord, it cannot be said that petitioners have committed any offence under Sections 363, 366, 506 I.P.C.
In the result, the writ petition succeeds and is accordingly allowed.
The impugned F.I.R. dated 6.3.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 64 of 2018 u/s 363, 366, 506 I.P.C., P.S.- Kabrai, District- Mahoba. as well as all proceedings initiated in pursuance to the same are hereby quashed.
There shall however be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 13.9.2018/Shalini
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Smt Rani Dixit And Others vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
13 September, 2018
Judges
  • Bala Krishna Narayana
Advocates
  • Narendra Kumar