Dismissed

Lalita Rani and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC20 Dec 2019CRLP/26185/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition seeking to quash an FIR for abduction filed against a married couple. Instead of an immediate quashing, the Court directed that the victim's statement be recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and directed that coercive measures be stayed pending the investigation, subject to future arrest if the victim supports the prosecution.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed with direction to record victim's statement under S. 164 Cr.P.C. and stay coercive measures.

Lalita Rani and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 43

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 26185 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Lalita Rani And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajiv Sisodia,Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

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

¶5

Heard Sri Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners and Dr. S.B. Maurya, the learned A.G.A.

¶6

This is a joint writ petition filed by the petitioners/married couple supported with their joint affidavit with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. Dated 6.12.2019 Case Crime No. 0597 of 2019, under section 366 I.P.C. PS.Dhampur, District Bijnor.

¶7

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that petitioner no.1 is an adult, as per High School Mark-sheet, her date of birth is 21.6.1999, she voluntarily solemnized marriage with petitioner no.2 (Pusphendra) on 8.12.2019 and are living peacefully as husband and wife, no offence is made out, F.I.R. be quashed.

¶8

Learned A.G.A, opposed the submission, but could not dispute the age of victim.

¶9

However, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the victim shall be produced before the court 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-incharge of the police station concerned. The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation. In case the victim 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 this direction, this petition is finally disposed of. Order Date :- 20.12.2019 Rk

Lalita Rani and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalita Rani and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Neeta Devi and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Brij Kishore Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ashok Chauhan Alias Dhananjay Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ravi Kumar @ Veer Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Dori and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Yogendra Singh Bhadauriya and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others