Roshni and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Affairs Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Jul 2024A482/2761/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant No.1 is the victim and applicant No.2 the accused; counsel argued that as both are majors who married and live together, offences under Sections 363 and 366 IPC were not committed. Respondent No.2 admitted the marriage. The court issued only an interim stay of the summoning order and listed the matter for further hearing.

What did the court decide?

Further proceedings of the summoning order dated 19.2.2028 in Session Trial No.859 of 2018 stayed till further orders; to be reviewed on 19.7.2024.

Roshni and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2761 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Roshni And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Affairs Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arshad Siddiqui Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Devanshu Pratap Singh,Devendra

¶4

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for respondent State.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant no.1 is the victim and the applicant no.2 is the accused in this case. F.I.R. has been lodged by respondent no.2. It is alleged that the victim in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and Section 164 Cr.P.C. has stated that she on her own accord went with the applicant no.2. The applicant no.2 has not committed any crime/wrong with her, therefore no offence under Section 363 and 366 Indian Penal Code has been committed.

¶7

Both the applicant no.1 and applicant no.2 are residing together. The victim has married with applicant no.2 on 15.4.2019. At the time of marriage, she was major. Both are residing together peacefully.

¶8

Learned counsel for respondent no.2 has admitted the factum of marriage in the short counter affidavit. He submits that he is admitting the contents of the petition. It is thus, submitted that

¶9

since the victim and the accused-applicant no.2 both are residing together, after becoming major both have married and respondent no.2 has no objection, no useful purpose will be served in allowing the impugned proceedings to be continued.

¶10

Perused the record.

¶11

Prima facie, the matter requires consideration.

¶12

Till further orders of this Court, the further proceeding of impugned summoning order dated 19.2.2028 passed in Session Trial No.859 of 2018 in Crime No.198 of 2016 under Section 363, 366 I.P.C., Police Station Nagram, District Lucknow shall remain stayed.

¶13

List on 19.7.2024.

¶14

Order Date :- 30.5.2024

¶15

Madhu

¶16

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Roshni and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Affairs Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Roshni and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Affairs Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mohd. Akhtar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy Home and Another

Pooja Sharma and Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Nitin Tiwari and Thru. Father Satish Kumar Tiwari and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home. Lko and Another

Shafiya Begam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Vidhan Sabha Marg Lko.

Mohammad Sufeeyan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Divyansh Vikram Singh and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others