Allowed

Smt. Shikha and 4 Ors. v. State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Allahabad HC7 May 2018CRLP/10951/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous writ petition, the court quashed an FIR alleged to be based on false and concocted allegations of abduction. The court found the girl was a major and her marriage to the petitioner was voluntary, thus serving no purpose in pending the petition.

What did the court decide?

The impugned FIR was quashed and the petty intervention of family members was restrained.

Smt. Shikha and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10951 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Smt. Shikha And 4 Ors. Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Babu Lal Ram,Rajesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Om Prakash Vishwakarma

¶4

Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Mahboob Ali,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner(s), learned counsel for respondent no. 4 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

In compliance of the order of this Court dated 4.5.2018, the girl, namely, Shikha has been produced before this Court in police custody from Nari Niketan, Allahabad.

¶7

This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F. I. R. which has been registered as Case Crime No. 47/2018, under Section- 363, 366, 120B, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Handia, district- Allahabad.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submitted that the impugned first information report has been lodged by the complainant-respondent containing absolutely false and concocted allegations against the petitioner(s) with the ulterior intention of harassing the petitioners; apart from the bald allegations made in the impugned F.I.R., no evidence is forthcoming even prima facie indicating at the complicity of the petitioner(s) in the commission of alleged offence and hence the impugned F.I.R. which is a bundle of lies and motivated by malice, is liable to be quashed. Further submission is that the girl is a major as her date of birth as per school leaving certificate is 20.06.1995 and as per high school certificate, her date of birth is 5.7.1999 and petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are major and they have also solemnized marriage out of their own sweet will without any pressure, threat or coercion and they are living happily as husband and wife, copy of the marriage certificate has also been annexed with the writ petition.

¶9

The Court has also been informed that a habeas corpus writ petition was filed before this Court being petition no. 2893 of 2018 which was dismissed on 3.5.2018 by another Bench of this Court.

¶10

The Court has been informed that petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are present before this Court and they have identified each other and also they have been identified by their counsel on the basis of the documents produced in his chamber. With the consent of the parties, the Court now proceeds to examine petitioner no. 1.

¶11

On being asked from petitioner no. 1 as to what is her name, she informs the Court that her name is "Shikha"; on being further asked as to what is her date of birth, she informs that her date of birth is "05.07.1999" as per high school marksheet and apparently, she appears to be major. She has also made a statement that she would like to go with her husband, namely, Rang Bahadur @ Dablu who is present before this Court.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for respondent no. 4 have strongly opposed the writ petition. However, the fact remains that they have not able to dispute the certificate of registration of marriage and the high school certificate-cum-marksheet, as per which the date of birth of the girl, namely, Shikha is 05.07.1999 and the veracity of the high school certificate-cum-marksheet has not been challenged.

¶13

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and also keeping in view the law as laid down by the Division Bench of this Court (Lucknow Bench) rendered in the cases of Vishal Jaiswal And Another v. State of U.P. and Others passed on 26.8.2016 in Misc. Bench No. 10724 of 2016 and Shaheen Parveen And Another vs. State of U.P. and Orthrs passed in writ petition no. 3519 (M/B) of 2015 and by the Apex Court in the cases of Lata Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in 2011 (6) SCC 396 (2014) and Shakti Vahini vs. Union of India passed in writ petition (civil) no. 231 of 2010 and Suhani & Another v. State of U.P. & Ors. passed in civil appeal no. 4532 of 2018 decided on 26.04.2018 , no purpose would be served in keeping the present case pending before this Court. Accordingly the instant writ petition is allowed and the impugned FIR registered as aforesaid case crime is hereby quashed. Consequences to follow.

¶14

The family members of the girl will not interfere in any manner whatsoever in the peaceful living of petitioner nos. 1 and 2. In case, they interfere in the peaceful living of petitioner nos. 1 and 2, they will be personally answerable to this Court.

¶15

The petitioners are also given liberty that in case any threat is extended to them or they have any apprehension with regard to their security, they may immediately file an application before the SSP/SP concerned along with the certified copy of the order and in case such an application is filed before the SSP/SP concerned, he will look into the matter personally and will ensure the safety of the petitioners.

¶16

With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition is allowed.

¶17

Order Date :- 7.5.2018 Anand

Smt. Shikha and 4 Ors. v. State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Shikha and 4 Ors. v. State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Radha @ Gunjan and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Amreen and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Pawan Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bharat @ Bhuvnesh and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Yogendra Vs State of U.P. and 02 Others

Km. Gayatri (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others