Allowed

Aman Kumar @ Aman Sharma v. State of U.P. and Others

Allahabad HC25 Jul 2023/4509/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dismissed the State's objection and allowed the applicant's plea to quash the FIR and charge sheet in a sexual offence case where the accused and victim had married and were living together.

What did the court decide?

The application was allowed; the charge sheet dated 16.02.2021 and summoning order dated 03.08.2021 are hereby quashed.

Aman Kumar @ Aman Sharma Vs State of U.P. and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:49030

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4509 of 2021 Applicant :- Aman Kumar @ Aman Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Mishra,Rajendra Prasad Tiwari,Shailesh Kumar Srivastava

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kaushlendra Verma,Rajneesh Kumar Verma,Shweta Singh,Vijayendra Prakash Tripathi

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶7

In pursuance of the earlier order dated 19.07.2023, applicant-Aman Kumar @ Aman Sharma s/o Late Pankaj Sharma r/o Village Isapur, P.S. Isapur, District Barabanki as well as respondent no. 2-Gyanendra Kumar s/o Hanuman Prasad r/o Village Isapur, P.S. Isapur, District Barabanki, Aadhar No. 773857942796 are present before this Court and have been duly identified by their respective counsel. The victim-respondent no. 3 of the present case is also present before this Court and has been identified by her counsel.

¶8

This application has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 16.02.2021 as well as summoning order dated 03.08.2021 passed in Criminal Case No. 1153 of 2021, (State Vs. Aman Sharma) arising out of F.I.R. No. 307 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, P.S. Masaoli, District Barabanki.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant as well as the victim were in love affair and willing to solemnize marriage, but the respondent no. 2 (father of the victim) was not agreed for the same, due to which, respondent no. 3 left her house on her own and went to the applicant. Later on, they entered into marriage on 22.12.2020. It is further submitted that the F.I.R. has been lodged due to annoyance by the informant-respondent on the basis of incorrect facts. It is further submitted that during the course of investigation, statements of victim were recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., in

¶10

which, she had not supported the prosecution version, but the Investigating OfÏcer filed the charge sheet in mechanical manner. It is vehemently submitted that now the applicant and respondent no. 3 have entered into marriage and are enjoying their matrimonial life and, therefore, the impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed.

¶11

Informant of the present case, Gyanendra Kumar, who is also present before this Court, on being asked the specific question that as to whether his daughter (respondent no. 3) is residing with the applicant, he answered 'Yes'. The respondent no. 2-informant also stated that now he does not want to prosecute the applicant, as his daughter is enjoying her matrimonial life with the applicant.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of the applicant and submits that the charge sheet has been filed after detail investigation. However, he does not dispute the fact that victim-respondent no. 2 has not supported the prosecution version in her statements recorded during the course of investigation.

¶13

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of application, statements of victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., marriage certificate of the victim and applicant as well as the statement given by the father of the victim before this Court, it is evident that the applicant and victim-respondent no. 3 have entered into marriage and are enjoying their matrimonial life. In such circumstances, it will be a futile exercise for court below to proceed with the trial.

¶14

In view of above, the application stands allowed.

¶15

The impugned proceedings are hereby quashed. OfÏce is directed to communicate this order to the court below, forthwith.

¶16

Order Date :- 25.7.2023/VKS

¶17

Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Aman Kumar @ Aman Sharma v. State of U.P. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aman Kumar @ Aman Sharma v. State of U.P. and 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

Sandeep Kumar @ Sandeep Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Lalit Patel ( Minor ) as Per Charge Sheet Lalit Verma Thru. His Father Chandra Pal and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Anuj Kumar and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Prateek Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko. and Another

Shiv Kumar Mishra and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another

Mushahid Ui Islam Hassan Khan @ Farzan Khan and 2 Other Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another