Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 25736 of 2019 Petitioner :- Sangeeta And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Raj Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J. Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard Sri Raj Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the State.
The petitioners in the writ petition are seeking quashing of the FIR dated 24.09.2019 registered as Case Crime No. 0118 of 2019 under Section 363, 366, 504, 352 IPC and Section 3(1)(dha) and 3(2)(VA) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Mishrauliya, District Siddharth Nagar.
As per the version of the FIR, on 13.9.2019 the daughter of the Complainant, Sangeeta Gautam who was studying in Chand Girls College, while she was returning home, she was enticed by Rajaram and ran away with him.
We have perused the documents on record. Copy of the result of High School issued by the Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad, U.P. of the petitioner no. 1 has been filed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition, wherein the date of birth of petitioner no. 1 has been mentioned as 03.07.2001. Copy of the Medical test of the petitioner no. 2 has been filed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition which mentions the age of the petitioner no.2 above 22 years. Thus it is amply clear that both the petitioners are major.
The petitioner no.1-Smt. Sangeeta and the petitioner no.2- Raja Ram are present in the court and have been identified by their counsel. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that both the petitioners are major and they have solemnized their marriage according to Hindu ritual. Copy of the Marriage Certificate issued by the Arya Samaj has been filed as Annexure-3 to the writ petition.
The Supreme Court in its judgement passed in Civil Appeal No. 4532 of 2018 (Suhani and another Vs. State of U.P. and others) has held as under:
"Considering the findings of physical, dental and radiological examinations we are of the considered opinion that the bone age of petitioner Miss. Suhani is between 19 - 24 years. In view of the conclusion arrived at by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, we are of the considered opinion that the petitioner no 1 is a major and the High Court was not correct in directing her to stay in Nari Niketan, Allahabad. The petitioner no. 1 admits the factum of marriage, before us. Therefore, she is entitled to accompany the petitioner no. 2, who is her husband.
In view of our conclusion that she is an adult and she had gone voluntarily with the petitioner no. 2 and entered into wedlock, the criminal proceedings initiated under section 363, 366 of the Indian Penal Court against the petitioner no. 2 stands quashed. We have passed this order of quashing the proceedings to do complete justice."
In the present case, it is not disputed between the parties that the petitioner no. 1-Smt.Sangeeta is major aged about 19 years. We have examined the girl petitioner no. 1 and she stated that she wants to live with her husband petitioner no. 2.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the law as laid down by the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Suhani (supra) as well as the fact that both the petitioners are major and the victim/girl has married with the petitioner no. 2 out of her own volition, we therefore, quash the impugned F.I.R.
The writ petition stands allowed.
Order Date :- 18.12.2019 Kirti