Allowed

Darshan Singh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC3 May 2018CRLP/11332/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court examined the victim who stated her marriage was marriages of her free will as she was major. The Court quashed coercive action pending investigation and directed fair, expedient police inquiry without retaliation against petitioners.

What did the court decide?

No coercive action allowed pending police report. Police to investigate fairly within three months.

Darshan Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 11332 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Darshan Singh And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ramesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

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

¶5

Exemption application is allowed.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned AGA for the State.

¶7

This writ petition has been filed for issuing a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned FIR registered as Case Crime No. 213 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C., Police Station- Raja, District Shahjananpur.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that victim Reeni is major and date of birth as per class VIII mark sheet is 14.08.1999; that both are major and she has eloped and solemnized marriage with petitioner no. 1 Darshan Singh out of their own sweet and free will without any fear, threat or coercion and they are living happily as husband and wife.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioners has identified both the petitioners on the basis of documents produced before him in his chamber as a counsel.

¶10

Since Reeni is present before this Court today, with the consent of learned counsel for the both side, the Court proceeds to examine her.

¶11

Accordingly, the Court has examined Reeni, who has made a statement before this Court ; on being asked 'aapka naam kya hai' she informed 'Reeni' on being asked 'aapke pita ka naam kya hai' she informed 'Munesh Chandra' on being asked 'aapki umar kitni hai' she informed '19 years' on being asked 'aap ki date of birth kya hai' she informed '14.08.1999' on being asked 'aapne shaadi ki hai' she informed 'ha Darshan Singh se ki hai' on being asked 'shaadi aapne apni marji se ki hai' she informed 'ha apni marji se bina kisi dabao ke ki hai' on being asked 'aap kaha tak padi hai' she informed 'mein class VIII tak padi huu' certificate of which is annexed at page 13 of the writ petition. She further contends no offence as alleged in the FIR has been made out, however, the police under the garb of investigation is unnecessarily harassing the petitioners.

¶12

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the law as laid down in the case of Sachin Pawar v. State of U.P. Passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1142 of 2013 decided on 2.8.2013 , and also in view of the statement made by the victim girl herself before this Court today, no purpose would be served in keeping the present matter pending any further before this Court. Accordingly, the present writ petition is being disposed off finally with the following directions:-

¶13

(a) Till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. no

¶14

coercive action shall be taken or initiated against the petitioners, however they shall participate and cooperate with the investigation;

¶15

(b) Copy of this order shall be forwarded to the concerned SSP/SP through the office of Government Advocate of this Court, who shall personally look into the matter and thereafter shall ensure that fair investigation is done in accordance with law without any whims, caprice or personal notion of morality;

¶16

(c) The police authorities are directed to investigate the matter fairly expeditiously and submit the report as per the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and in accordance with the law preferably within a period of three months from today keeping in view the law as laid down by the Division Bench of this Court at Lucknow Bench in the case 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 v. State of U.P. And others passed in writ petition no. 3519 (M/B) of 2015 and by the Apex Court in the cases of Lata Singh v. State of U.P. And another; 2011(6) SCC 396 and Shakti Vahini v. Union of India passed in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 231 of 2010.

¶17

(d) Liberty is also given to the respondents that if anyone of them has any grievance with this order, he/she may move recall application in the present proceedings itself;

¶18

(e) It is also being made clear that if the investigation has been completed and the police has already submitted report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., the present order will not be given effect to.

¶19

The writ petition, accordingly, stands disposed off finally.

¶20

Order Date :- 3.5.2018 Ujjawal

Darshan Singh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Darshan Singh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

smt. Kiran and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rubi Jahan and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Ashish Singh and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Rekha and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Prashant and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Raju @ Lucky and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others