Allowed

Bhupendra and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC20 Feb 2018CRLP/3199/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition seeking to quash an F.I.R. registered under Section 366 I.P.C. The petitioners argued that the prosecutrix was a major who voluntarily married the accused. Relying on the judgment in Sachin Pawar vs. State of U.P, the court held that no cognizable offence was made out and quashed the F.I.R. and subsequent proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The impugned F.I.R. dated 02.02.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 88 of 2018 and all subsequent proceedings against the petitioners in pursuance thereof are quashed.

Bhupendra and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3199 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Bhupendra And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar,Pushpendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Krishna Pratap Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Arvind Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Hemant Sharma, Advocate holding brief of Sri Pushpendra Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4, Sri Vikas Sahai, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to quash the impugned First Information Report dated 02.02.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 88 of 2018, under Section 366 I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali Dehat, District Bulandshahar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the prosecutrix/petitioner no. 5 and petitioner no. 1 both are major aged about 27 years and 23 years respectively as per their High School Certificate, copies of which have been annexed as Annexure-2 & 3 to the writ petition. He further submits that there was love affair between the petitioner no. 5 and 1 and they both have performed marriage on 06.12.2016 according to Hindu Rites and Rituals before the Arya Samaj Mandir, Tilapta, Greater Noida at Gautam Budh Nagar, a copy of their marriage certificate issued by Arya Samaj Mandir Tilapta, Greater Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar is annexed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition. He next argued that the petitioner no. 5 had voluntarily left her parental home and entered into matrimonial alliance with petitioner no. 1 and that she was major, it cannot be said that any cognizable offence against the petitioner nos. 5 and 1 is made out, hence the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that as the petitioner nos. 5 and 1 are major and they have voluntarily married, then to conceive in view of the judgment of Apex Court rendered in Criminal Appeal No. 1142 of 2013

¶8

(Sachin Pawar vs. State of U.P) decided on 02.08.2013) , that, offence has been committed under Section 366 I.P.C., cannot be approved of.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. submitted that the impugned F.I.R. is not liable to be quashed on the basis of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has not been able to demonstrate that either the prosecutrix Smt. Kajal Bhardwaj was minor on the date of the incident or that she had been kidnapped or abducted by the petitioner no. 2 to 4, in view of the above it cannot be said that the petitioner nos. 2 to 4 have committed any cognizable offence. The writ petition accordingly succeeds and is allowed.

¶11

The impugned F.I.R. and all subsequent proceedings taken against the petitioners in pursuance thereof are hereby quashed.

¶12

There shall however be no order as to costs.

¶13

(Krishna Pratap Singh,J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)

¶14

Order Date :- 20.2.2018 M/A.

Bhupendra and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhupendra and 4 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

Ashok Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Umesh Kumar Yadav and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Smt. Neelam Vs State of U.P. and 5 Ors.

Nahima Alias Naeema and Another Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Kriti Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pramendra Kumar @ Parvind and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.