Allowed

Arjun Raikwar and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC19 Apr 2023A482/722/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed criminal proceedings involving cheating, kidnapping, and POCSO charges. The court held that the continued prosecution would ruin the applicants' happy married life and be an abuse of process since the accused married the daughter of the complainant, they have a child, and a compromise was reached.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings of Case No. 450 of 2017 arising out of Crime No. 131 of 2017 under Sections 363, 366, 506 IPC and Sections 7/8 of POCSO Act are quashed.

Arjun Raikwar and Another Vs State of U.P… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 722 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Arjun Raikwar And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Ajay Srivatava, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned AGA for the State.

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 26.09.2017 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No. 450 of 2017 (State vs. Arjun Raikwar and another), arising out of Case Crime No.131 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 506 I.P.C. and 7/8 of POCSO Act, Police StationBadagaon, District-Jhansi, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IInd, Jhansi.

¶7

On 10.04.2023, the following order was passed:-

¶8

"Heard Mr. Ajay Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned AGA for the State.

¶9

On 16.01.2023, the following order was passed:-

¶10

"List revised.

¶11

Heard Sri Ajay Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri B.B. Upadhyay, learned State counsel and perused the record.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicants argued that the applicant no. 1/Arjun Raikwar and the daughter of the opposite party no. 2 have married each other and are living together as husband and wife and from the wedlock a child was born. It is argued that they have also entered into compromise and compromise has been drawn between them. Copy of compromise is annexure no. 7 to the affidavit, which is dated 14.12.2022. Para-9 and 10 of the affidavit has been placed before the Court to buttress the said arguments. It is argued that the applicant no. 1 is on bail.

¶13

Matter requires consideration.

¶14

Issue notice to the opposite party no. 2 through R.P.A.D., returnable within four weeks. Steps be taken within a week.

¶15

Opposite party no. 2 may file counter affidavit, if any, within the said period. Learned State counsel may also file counter affidavit, if any, within the same period. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within two weeks thereafter, if any.

¶16

Let the matter be listed on 10.4.2023. "

¶17

In compliance of the aforesaid order, notice issued to opposite party no.2 has not been received back as is evident from the office report dated 10.04.2023.

¶18

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant no.1 and daughter of opposite party no.2 have married each other and are living happily married life, therefore, continuation of proceeding of criminal case against them is nothing but an abuse of process of law and will ruin the happy married life.

¶19

In view of the above, applicant nos.1 & 2, namely, Arjun Raikwar and Smt. Jyoti are directed to appear before this Court on the next date fixed.

¶20

List this case on 19.04.2023.

¶21

Learned counsel for the applicants shall inform about this order to the applicants.

¶22

Registrar compliance shall also ensure compliance of this order.

¶23

Till then, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in Case No.450 of 2017 arising out of Case Crime No.131 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 506 IPC and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, P.S.-Badagaon, District-Jhansi."

¶24

In compliance of aforesaid order, the applicant no.1, namely, Arjun Raikwar and daughter of opposite party no.2, namely, Km. Jyoti are present before this Court, who have been identified by and their signatures have also been attested by their respective counsel. The daughter of opposite party no.2Km. Jyoti had already married Arjun Raikwar (applicant no. 1) and out of their wedlock, they are blessed with a child, who is aged about three years. They are living a happy married life. She also stated that the marriage has been accepted by the family of Arjun Raikwar, and she does not want to proceed with the case. She also states that she is authorized counsel for the applicants to represent her. The applicant no.1-Arjun Raikwar, who is also present before this Court, has stated that he will take proper care of Km. Jyoti.

¶25

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant no.1 and daughter of opposite party no.2 are living a happy married life, therefore, the continuance of proceedings would ruin the happy married life of the applicant no.1 and Km. Jyoti and also career of the child born out of their wedlock will be affected, therefore, the same may be quashed.

¶26

Learned A.G.A. has supported the submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicants.

¶27

Keeping in mind the aforesaid facts, the continuance of proceedings against the applicants is not only sheer wastage of time of the Court but also an abuse of the process of law and would ruin the happy married life of the applicants, therefore, the proceedings of the aforesaid case, are hereby quashed.

¶28

Accordingly, this application u/s 482 is allowed .

¶29

Order Date :- 19.4.2023 Imtiyaz

¶30

Digitally signed by :- IMTIYAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Arjun Raikwar and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun Raikwar 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

Qamar Ahmad @ Guddan and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajendra and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Om Prakhash Vs State of U.P. and Another

Robin Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P and Another

Sukhvir Vs State of U.P.

Neeraj Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another