Court dismissed criminal matter maintaining couple's marriage without coercion, exempting them from police action until case report submission while directing fair investigation.
No coercive action against petitioners pending police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.; police directed to investigate fairly.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3566 of 2018
Petitioner :- Amvika Prasad Gautam And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sharad Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Mahboob Ali,J.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
In view of office report service of notice upon respondent no.3 is deemed to be sufficient.
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. 107 of 2018 u/s 366 IPC PS Chakeri District Kanpur Nagar.
We have perused the interim order dated 15.2.2018 which shows that both the petitioners are adult and have solemnized marriage. As per the FIR itself the age of the girl is 22 years.
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 , 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:-
(a) Till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. no coercive action shall be taken or initiated against the petitioners, however they shall participate and cooperate with the investigation;
(b) Copy of this order shall be forwarded to the concerned SSP/SP through the office of Government Advocate of this Court, who after keeping in mind the age of the girl as mentioned in the FIR itself shall look into the matter and will also look into the question as to whether any further investigation is required or not and thereafter will issue necessary direction to concerned investigating officer;
(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.
(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;
(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.
The writ petition, accordingly, stands disposed off finally.
Order Date :- 28.5.2018 SP
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to quash the FIR registered under Section 366 IPC alleging offence of kidnapping for marriage.
Whether to grant liberty to petitioners from coercive action pending police report submission.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sachin Pawar v. State of U.P.Explained¶9
Sachin Pawar v. State of U.P. Passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1142 of 2013 decided on 2.8.2013
Vishal Jaiswal and another v. State of U.P.Explained¶12
Vishal Jaiswal and another v. State of U.P. and others passed on 26.8.2016 in Misc. Bench No. 10724 of 2016
Shaheen Parveen and another v. State of U.P.Explained¶12
Shaheen Parveen and another v. State of U.P. And others passed in writ petition no. 3519 (M/B) of 2015
Lata Singh v. State of U.P.Explained¶12
Lata Singh v. State of U.P. And another; 2011(6) SCC 396 · Who else cites this
Shakti Vahini v. Union of IndiaExplained¶12
Shakti Vahini v. Union of India passed in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 231 of 2010
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Amvika Prasad Gautam
Second Petitioner
State Of U.P.
Vipin Sinha
Mahboob Ali
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
