Disposed

Mohd. Irsaad Alias Irshad and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC13 Jun 2024CRLP/4205/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted an interim stay preventing the arrest of petitioners facing a cognizance FIR related to a marriage dispute, conditioned on recording statements by the parties and an investigation.

What did the court decide?

Stay on arrest of petitioners pending sufficient evidence; direction to record statements; direction for exchange of pleadings.

Mohd. Irsaad Alias Irshad and Others… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 9

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4205 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- Mohd. Irsaad Alias Irshad And Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vivek Kumar Verma,Rohit Kumar Verma

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

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

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶7

The petitioners seek issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the First Information Report dated 05.06.2024 bearing Case Crime No. 0205 of 2024 under Sections 376-D, 328, 506 & 507 IPC, Police Station- Dargah Sharif, DistrictBahraich.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the victim had married petitioner No.1 out of her own choice and even appeared before the Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.3031/2024 in which the following order was passed on 27.04.2024:

¶9

" Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶10

Petitioners claim to have married each other of their own volition and also claim that on the date of their marriage, they were of marriageable age. Petitioner No.1 has annexed Copy of Aadhar Card and Pan Card as Annexure No.4 in this regard as proof of age. Petitioner No.2 has also filed copy of Aadhar Card in support of his age proof. Both the petitioners are present before the court duly identified by their counsel. He further says that there is no F.I.R. against the petitioners and they are not wanted in any criminal case, yet the police is harassing them at the behest of family members, who are not agreeable to the marriage. Therefore, this petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the opposite parties not to interfere in peaceful married life of the petitioners.

¶11

In view of the above, it is provided that if the petitioners have married each other and are living together, were of the marriageable age on the date of their marriage and they are not wanted in any criminal case, then the police shall not unnecessarily interfere in their peaceful married life. It is, however, made clear that this Court has not entered into, nor adjudicated the age of the petitioners, nor veracity/ validity of the alleged marriage.

¶12

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of." Thereafter, when she again went back to her parents to meet them apparently under pressure she has lodged the present FIR against the petitioners. The FIR is contrary to all the documentary records.

¶13

A case for consideration is made out.

¶14

Issue notice to opposite party no. 4. Steps be taken within a week.

¶15

Let the pleadings be exchanged within four weeks.

¶16

List this case after four weeks.

¶17

Considering the submissions made, it is provided that till the next date of listing, petitioners shall not be arrested in pursuance to the First Information Report dated 05.06.2024 bearing Case Crime No. 0205 of 2024 under Sections 376-D, 328, 506 & 507 IPC, Police Station- Dargah Sharif, DistrictBahraich, unless and until there is sufficient and cogent evidence available against them regarding commission of the offence. The petitioners shall, however, cooperate in the investigation and get their statements recorded before the Investigating Officer as and when they are called. Opposite party No.4 (girl) shall also record her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C.. If, they do not do so then it can be a ground for seeking vacation of this interim order.

¶18

Order Date :- 14.6.2024 Reena/-

¶19

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

¶20

Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Irsaad Alias Irshad and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Irsaad Alias Irshad and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Gaurangi and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Govt. of U.P., Lko. and Others

Ramesh Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Govt. Lko. and Others

Smt. Shiv Kala @ Sukala vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Others

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

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

Mohd. Irsaad Alias Irshad and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Others