Disposed

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

Allahabad HC12 Apr 2019CRLP/9582/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Writ Court refused to quash the FIR regarding an inter-dince marriage. It directed the Chief Judicial Magistrate to ascertain the petitioner's age via medical examination and ordered that the second petitioner not be arrested till the final report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash FIR refused; directive to ascertain age and prevent arrest of petitioner no. 2 till final report.

Karishma and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 46

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9582 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Karishma And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gaurav Pundir Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Perdeep Kumar Vishnoi

¶4

Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Anil Kumar-IX,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.A.

¶6

By means of the present writ petition, the the petitioners have invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the FIR dated 03.04.2019 lodged by respondent no. 4 registered as Case Crime No. 107 of 2019, under Section 363 I.P.C., Police Station -Nagina, District-Bijnor.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioners has identified the petitioner no. 1 Smt. Karishma and petitioner no. 2 Bittu, who are present before this Court. It is submitted that the petitioner no.1 has voluntarily performed marriage with the petitioner no.2 without any coercion, duress or undue influence according to Hindu Customs & Rites. The petitioners are being unnecessarily harassed by the police personnel on the basis of false allegations made in the first information report lodged by the respondent no. 4, who is father of petitioner no. 1.

¶8

Per contra learned AGA contended that the allegations made against the petitioners cannot be aborted at this stage. There is complicity of the petitioner no. 2 in the commission of the said crime. The petitioners are involved in the serious offence .

¶9

Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case and also from the bald perusal of the FIR, prima facie cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner no. 2. At this stage hence there is no ground for interfering in the FIR, therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned FIR is refused.

¶10

However, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.A., it emerges out that petitioner no. 1 is major, but no reliable proof regarding her age has been annexed with the petition hence we direct her to appear before the Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned within two weeks from today, who shall get her medical examination done within a week thereafter by the CMO concerned to ascertain her age. The age certificate will contain self attested photograph of petitioner no. 1. Thereupon, the I.O. concerned shall record her statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. and also move an application before the C.J.M. concerned for getting her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., who shall record the same. The investigation officer shall provide her full protection.

¶11

Petitioner no. 1 is directed to be taken by the respondent no. 4 who is her legal guardian.

¶12

It is further directed that the petitioners no. 2 shall not be arrested in the aforesaid crime till the submission of the report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C, subject to restraint

¶13

that he shall cooperate with the investigation.

¶14

This writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶15

Order Date :- 12.4.2019 Sharad/-

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karishma 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of U.P. Vs Ankit and 2 Ors.

Ishwari and Anr. Vs State of U.P.

Neeraj Jadaun and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ramsurat @ Rampratap Yadav and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Jameel Ahmad and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others