Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10783 of 2018 Petitioner :- Renu Kumari And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pramod Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Sri Mohan Singh Verma, Advocate, has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no.3 today in Court, which is taken on record.
Heard Sri P.K.Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Mohan Singh Verma, learned counsel for respondent no.3, Sri Sanjay Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned FIR as well as material brought on record.
This petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to quash the FIR dated 16.4.2018, registered as Case Crime No.249 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Sadabad Kotwali, District Hathras.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case with malafide intention. He further submits that the first wife of petitioner no.2 lodged an FIR against respondent no.3 and others being Case Crime No.172 of 2018, under Sections 364, 323, 354, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Hathras, District Hathras which was challenged by them before this Court by means of filing Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No.9268 of 2018, in which their arrest has been stayed by this Court vide order dated 12.4.2018, copy of which has been produced and the same is taken on record. He next argued that the victim petitioner no.1 who is daughter of respondent no.3 has voluntarily eloped with petitioner no.2 and married with him at Arya Samaj Mandir Trust, Old Vijay Nagar, Ghaziabad and thereafter they also got their marriage registered before the Registrar Hindu Marriage, Ghaziabad on 10.1.2018, copy of which is annexed at page 26 of the writ petition and as on date they are living together as husband and wife, hence, the impugned FIR by respondent no.3 against the petitioners levelling false and frivolous allegation,though no offence is made out against them, hence, FIR is liable to be quashed.
Learned counsel for respondent no.3 as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR, but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the petitioners.
Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and nature of the allegations, it is directed that the petitioners shall not be arrested in above mentioned case, till the submission of the police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. but they shall co-operate with the investigation of the case.
With the above direction, this petition is finally disposed of.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 27.4.2018 NS