Disposed

Smt. Rukhsar Khatoon and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC19 Dec 2019CRLP/26058/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused to quash the FIR but granted interim bail by directing that coercive action be withheld pending the victim's production for age determination and statement recording; arrest remains possible if the victim is a minor or supports the prosecution.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing FIR refused; interim stay on arrest granted contingent upon victim's production for age proof and statement recording.

Smt. Rukhsar Khatoon and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 43

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 26058 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Smt. Rukhsar Khatoon And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajeshwar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Rajeshwar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed, seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent concerned, not to arrest the petitioners, with a further prayer for quashing the impugned FIR dated 17.10.2019, registered as Case Crime No.0296/2019, under Sections 366/363 IPC, P.S. Ramkola, Kushi Nagar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it's a joint petition on behalf of petitioner no.1 / wife and petitioner no.2 / husband, supported by a joint affidavit, victim is major but there is no documentary proof in that support.

¶8

From the perusal of the FIR, it appears that on the basis of allegation made therein, prima facie cognizable offence is made out. There is no scope of interfering in the FIR. Therefore, the prayer for quashing the FIR is refused.

¶9

However, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the victim shall be produced before the court concerned, it is directed that in case the victim appears / produced before the court of learned C.J.M. concerned within 20 days from today and moves an application for her medical examination, recording her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C, the learned Magistrate shall fix a date, on which she shall be produced before the C.M.O, by the police officer for her medical examination to determine her age, thereafter, she shall be produced before the CJM concerned for recording her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C., the same shall be recorded on the application filed by the I.O./Officer-in-charge of the police station concerned. The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation. In case the victim appears to be a minor or if she is major but supports the prosecution version, it shall be open to the police to arrest the petitioners, till then no coercive

¶10

measures shall be taken against the petitioners. In case the petitioners approach the Superintendent of Police concerned to provide security for the above mentioned purpose, same shall be provided to them.

¶11

It is further directed that issue of custody of the victim shall also be decided by the CJM concerned in accordance with law.

¶12

With the above direction this petition is finally disposed of .

¶13

Order Date :- 19.12.2019 Chandra

Smt. Rukhsar Khatoon and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Rukhsar Khatoon 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Arti and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shivangi Nishad Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Smt. Pooja and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Daman Singh (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Mohd. Arshad Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others