Allowed

Priyanka and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC22 May 2018CRLP/8246/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging an FIR under Sections 363 and 366 IPC regarding a marriage, the court held that as the victim is 19, the matter is consensual. The FIR was quashed, and coercive action stayed pending the police report, directing a fair investigation within three months.

What did the court decide?

FIR quashed; coercive action stayed pending police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., with direction to fair investigation within three months.

Priyanka and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 8246 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Priyanka And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Azhar Hussain Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

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

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

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.0016 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C., Police Station- Mantola, District Agra.

¶7

In view of the office report dated 21.05.2018 service of notice is deemed to be sufficient upon respondent no.4.

¶8

Perusal of the interim order dated 03.04.2018, which shows that victim is petitioner no.1 and accused is petitioner no.2; both are major and they have also solemnized marriage out of their own sweet will without any threat fear or coercion and they are living happily as husband and wife; as per adhar card the date of birth of the victim is 01.01.1999; even as per the FIR, her age is about 19 years.

¶9

Thus, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case 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:-

¶10

(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;

¶11

(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;

¶12

(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

¶13

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 .

¶14

(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;

¶15

(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.

¶16

The writ petition, accordingly, stands disposed off finally.

¶17

The aforesaid order has been passed with the consent of all the learned counsel for the parties concerned.

¶18

Order Date :- 22.5.2018 Radhika

Priyanka and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Priyanka and Another 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

Rizwana Parveen @ Rajni and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mohd Waseek and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ajai Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Kaushal Kumari @ Kaushalya Devi and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vikesh Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohit Kashyap @ Manish Kashyap and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others