This judgment dismissed a criminal writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR filed for bigamy. The court held that the female petitioner was a minor at the time of the FIR, rendering her affidavit stating her age as 20 years a false statement on oath, thus decimating the case for quashing.
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. - 36
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 17342 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mithlesh Kumar And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bal Ram Prasad Sen Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
The present petition is directed against the First Information Report lodged on 8.3.2018. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that both the petitioner nos.1 and 2 are major as they have crossed minimum age for marriage of 18 and 21 years and they have performed their marriage in temple and are living as husband and wife. Inorder to assert the petitioners being major, copies of Aadhar card of both the petitioners have been appended with the affidavit accompanying the writ petition.
A perusal of Aadhar card of petitioner no.2 indicates that her date of birth of is 2.6.2001 meaning thereby, she had attained the majority in the month of June, 2019. On the date of lodging of the First Information Report, it, thus, appears that the petitioner no.2 was minor.
In the affidavit accompanying the writ petition, the age of petitioner no.2 has been mentioned 20 years. The affidavit filed in support of the writ petition is, thus, a wrong statement on oath.
No case is, thus, made out for quashing of the First Information Report, the writ petition is found devoid of merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 25.6.2019 Harshita
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Special Marriage Act, 1954 can be invoked when the female petitioner was a minor at the time of marriage and FIR lodging.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Not citedReferred
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mithlesh Kumar And Another
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Sunita Agarwal
Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
