Disposed

Smt. Madhuri Devi and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Sectt. Lko and Others

Allahabad HC22 Apr 2024CRLP/2807/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 2807 of 2024, the Allahabad High Court addressed a petition seeking quashing of an F.I.R. involving a marriage. The court issued a restriction order prohibiting arrest pending investigation and outlined procedural steps for the investigating officer.

What did the court decide?

Restriction order issued prohibiting arrest of petitioners pending investigation and recording of statements.

Smt. Madhuri Devi and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 9

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2807 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- Smt. Madhuri Devi And Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Sectt. Lko And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shravan Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J. Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

By means of this petition, the petitioners have sought quashing of F.I.R. dated 05.04.2024 bearing Case Crime No.0105 of 2024 for the offence under Sections504,506,366 I.P.C. registered at Police Station-Raniganj, District-Pratapgarh.

¶7

It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioner nos.1 and 2 are major and have married with each other by their own free will on 06.04.2024 as per Hindu Rites and Rituals in Arya Samaj, Krishn Nagar, Prayagraj. The copy of the marriage certificate issued by the Arya Samaj Krishn Nagar has been annexed as Annexure No.2 to the writ petition. In the F.I.R. the age of petitioner no.1 is mentioned as 21 years. In view of the above, he says that no offence under Section 366 I.P.C. is made out.

¶8

Considering the aforesaid, let notice be issued to opposite party no.4.

¶9

Let counter affidavit be filed in the matter within four weeks.

¶10

List this case after four weeks.

¶11

In view of the above, till the next date of listing, it is provided that petitioners shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case crime number unless and until there is sufficient and credible evidence available against them indicating the commission of offence as alleged in the F.I.R. and/or they are found to have been minors on the date of their marriage. However, petitioners shall appear

¶12

before the investigating officer as and when they are called to get their statements recorded. Investigating officer shall also take steps for recording of statement of petitioner no.1 before the Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, investigation shall be taken to its logical conclusion.

¶13

(Narendra Kumar Johari, J.) (Vivek Chaudhary, J.)

¶14

Order Date :- 22.4.2024 Arjun/-

¶15

Digitally signed by :- ARJUN PRASAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt. Madhuri Devi and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Sectt. Lko and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Madhuri Devi and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Sectt. Lko and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Anwar Gafoor Shaikh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Govt. Lko. and Others

Piyush Kumar Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others

Ankit Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Jyoti and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

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

Smt. Sarita and and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others