Court No. - 48
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 20641 of 2019 Petitioner :- Smt. Shraddha Devi And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,J. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Rajiv Lochan Dubey, learned A.G.A. for the State- respondent.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking quashment of FIR dated 04.04.2017 in respect of Crime No. 0358 of 2017 for the offence under Sections 363, 342, 376 of IPC and Section 4 of POCSO Act, P.S. Karwi Kotwali Nagar, District Chitrakoot.
Counsel for the petitioners submits that he is not pressing this petition so far as it relates to quashment of FIR is concerned. He, however, submits that petitioner no. 1, Smt. Sharddha Devi, daughter of respondent no. 3, is a major lady, aged about 18 years. She has performed marriage with petitioner no.2 Pawan Kumar Tiwari @ Pawan Kumar on 09.10.2017 and out of the wedlock, they have a male child also and the couple is living happily. It has been further argued that as per the medical report, age of prosecutrix is 18 years. He submits that petitioner no. 3 is brother of petitioner no.2 and petitioner no.4 is neighbour. He further submits that even if the entire case is taken as it is, there is every likelihood that the police may not file charge sheet against the petitioners. He further submits that as the petitioner no.2 has performed marriage with the daughter of respondent no. 3 against his wishes, for the moment, respondent no. 3 may be annoyed with the petitioner no.2 but there is every possibility that in near future, the dispute would be resolved amicably. Lastly, he submits that till the investigation is completed, petitioners be protected.
State counsel has no objection so far as withdrawal of writ petition is concerned. He, however, submits that the medical examination showing age of the prosecutrix as 18 years, has been done on 21.08.2019, whereas offence has been committed in the year 2017 and in every possibility in the year 2017, the prosecutrix was below 18 years of age. He further submits that as per documentary evidence, the prosecutrix was 18 years of age.
Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, in particular, the age of the prosecutrix, who is aged about 18 years and the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioners, we are not inclined to quash the criminal proceedings.
Be that as it may, considering the fact that the interim order which is operating in favour of the petitioners since 13.08.2019, it is directed that it shall remain in operation till filing of charge-sheet, till then no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners.
The petition is accordingly, disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.8.2019 A. Tripathi/T.S.