Disposed

Virendra Singh Alias Shanu v. State of U.P. Thru. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC23 Jul 2024A482/4378/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single bench of the Allahabad High Court allowed an application under Section 482 CrPC to stay proceedings without deciding on quashing. Notice was issued to the second respondent, who was permitted to file a counter affidavit and rejoinder before the next hearing.

What did the court decide?

Impugned proceedings stayed pending outcome of notice served on respondent No.2; time granted for counter affidavit and rejoinder.

Virendra Singh Alias Shanu Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4378 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Virendra Singh Alias Shanu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Deptt. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sunita Dwivedi,Himanshu Tiwari,Surendra Kumar Mourya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶5

1.The petition has been filed under Section 482 CrPC for quashing entire proceeding of case S.T.No.5455 of 2021 case crime No.521 of 2020 under sections 376, 506 I.P.C., 67/67A I.T.Act, P.S. Chinhat, district Lucknow, pending before the court of ADJ/FTC II, Lucknow arising out of charge sheet No.1 of 2020, police station Chinhat, Lucknow.

¶6

2.Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

3.Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and the victim are having consensual relationship since 2015 as per admitted case of the prosecution. Due to dispute of plot, the first information report has been lodged which is evident from perusal of the statement of victim under section 164 CrPC. Had there been no dispute regarding the plot, no first information report could have been filed. This is the case of the victim under section 164 CrPC.

¶8

It is submitted that both the petitioner and the victim have married according to Hindu rites and rituals in Arya Samaj Mandir, Aliganj, Lucknow on 24.3.2023 vide certificate, Annexure-2, which was registered before the Sub Registrar under Section 8 of the Hindu Marriage Act vide registration certificate dated 24.3.2023, annexure-

¶9

It is submitted that both the parties are major and they are having consensual relationship for the last nine years and now they have been living as husband and wife. It is submitted that even if the prosectuion case is taken as it is, the ingredients of offence under section 376 I.P.C. are not borne out.

¶10

4.Considering the argument advanced, perusal of the record as also the judgments of Supreme Court in Naim Ahamed versus State (NCT of Delhi) Criminal Appeal No.257 of 2023 (para 21) and Shambhu Kharwar versus State of U.P. and another Criminal appeal No.1231 of 2022 (paras 13 and 14), I find that the matter requires consideration.

¶11

5.Issue notice to respondent No.2.

¶12

Four weeks' time is allowed to file counter affidavit, two weeks then for the rejoinder.

¶13

6.List on 23.7.2024.

¶14

7.Till the next date of listing, the impugned proceedings shall remain stayed.

¶15

Order Date :- 13.5.2024 kkb/

¶16

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Virendra Singh Alias Shanu v. State of U.P. Thru. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virendra Singh Alias Shanu v. State of U.P. Thru. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Manoj Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Ishhaq Alias Ishhaq Ahmad and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Yasoob Abbas and Others Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Civil Secrtt. Lko. and Others

Suman vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another

Mohd. Adil and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Mohammad Qadeer and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, U.P. Lucknow and Another