Disposed

Kajal Rajak and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC11 Jan 2024CRLP/136/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition sought quashing of an FIR under Section 366 IPC lodged by petitioner no.1's father; petitioners alleged she is a major living of her own free will. Court directed petitioners to appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 days for statements and investigation to proceed, with interim protection from arrest till next date.

What the court decided

AI extract

Kajal Rajak and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 9

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 136 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- Kajal Rajak And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home U.P. Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manjeet Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.

¶5

Heard.

¶6

The writ petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:-

¶7

Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 20.12.2023 by opposite party No.4 in FIR/Case Crime No.433/2023, under section 366 IPC Police Station Leelapur, District Pratapgarh, as contained in Annexure No. 1 to the writ Petition, so far its relate to petitioner No.2.

¶8

Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 20.12.2023 by opposite party No.4 in FIR/Case Crime No.433/2023, under section 366 IPC Police Station Leelapur, District Pratapgarh, as contained in Annexure No. 1 to the writ Petition, so far its relate to petitioner No.2.

¶9

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioner no. 1, who is major, is living with the petitioner of her own free will. The affidavit filed in support of the writ petition has been filed by the petitioner no. 1. The grievance is that the father of the petitioner no. 1 has lodged an F.I.R. against the petitioner no. 1 under Section 366 I.P.C.. The petitioner no. 1 is already married to somebody else but the husband has not initiated any proceedings assuming that this could be done in law.

¶10

It is contented that story set up in the F.I.R. is concocted one. In view of facts notices as above, prima facie case is made out.

¶11

Considering the facts of the case, let the petitioners appear before the Investigating within the next 10 days and get their statement recorded, thereafter the Investigating Officer shall take the investigation to its logical end at the earliest.

¶12

Let the Dasti notice be also issued to the petitioners for service upon the opposie party no. 4, through, S.H.O, concerned, meaning-thereby, the S.H.O, shall serve copy of the notice upon the opposite party no. 4 and file his affidavit of service before this Court.

¶13

Ms. Ranjana Srivastava, learned A.G.A. shall ensure compliance of this order.

¶14

List on 15.2.2024.

¶15

Till the next date of listing, it is provided that the petitioners shall not be arrested on the basis of the impugned First Information Report, unless there is sufficient and credible evidence is available against them.

¶16

(Narendra Kumar Johari,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.)

¶17

Order Date :- 11.1.2024 Anuj Singh

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Kajal Rajak and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Kajal Rajak and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Sagar vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue and 3 Others

Nilima Srivastava vs U.P. Real Estate Regulatory Authority Thru. Chairman and 2 Others

Vivek Baranwal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

Smt. Savitri Devi and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Affairs U.P. Lko. and Others

Bechu vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

Mahipat Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Housing and Urban Planning, Civil Secrt. Lucknow and Others