Disposed

Akhilesh Agnihotri in Fir Abhishek Agnihotri @ Lucky and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC16 Dec 2024CRLP/4330/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A two-judge bench heard a petition seeking quashing of an FIR under Section 366 IPC. The court noted claims of consensual cohabitation and marriage but, rather than deciding on merits, directed exchange of pleadings, registered interim protection from arrest, and ordered the couple to record statements and attempt a Special Marriage Act registration by the next hearing.

What did the court decide?

Interim stay on arrest granted for the petitioner; case listed after 4 weeks; direction to record statements and register marriage under S.M.A. 1954.

Akhilesh Agnihotri in Fir Abhishek… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 9

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4330 of 2024 Petitioner :- Akhilesh Agnihotri In Fir Abhishek Agnihotri @ Lucky And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Others

¶3

Counsel for Petitioner :- Bal Keshwar Srivastava,Ravi Patel Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Arshad Jameel

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶6

The petitioners seek issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the First Information Report dated 28.05.2024 bearing Case Crime No.0328 of 2024 under Section 366 IPC, Police Station- Mandiyaon, District- Lucknow North (Commissionerate Lucknow).

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the girl (petitioner no.2) is major who has given her own affidavit that she has accompanied petitioner no.1 on her own volition and they are living together. In support of her age proof petitioner no.2 has annexed her High School Examination Certificate which is annexed as Annexure-2, wherein her date of birth is mentioned as 26.01.2006. The petitioners have also annexed photograph of their marriage as annexure no.3 to the petition. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also stated that as the petitioners were of marriageable age at the time of marriage, no offence under Section 366 IPC is made out.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioners further states that petitioners are proceeding to get their marriage conducted under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, but due to pressure of police and family members, they are unable to do the same. Learned counsel for the petitioners assures the Court that the petitioners shall forthwith proceed to get their marriage conducted under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 and will produce the documents with regard to the same by the next date of listing.

¶9

The matter requires consideration.

¶10

Let the pleadings be exchanged within four weeks.

¶11

List this case after four weeks along with relevant documents under the Special Marriage Act, 1954.

¶12

Considering the submissions made, it is provided that till the next date of listing, petitioner no.1 shall not be arrested in pursuance to the First Information Report dated 28.05.2024 bearing Case Crime No.0328 of 2024 under Section 366 IPC, Police Station- Mandiyaon, District- Lucknow North (Commissionerate Lucknow). The petitioner shall, however, cooperate in the investigation and get his statements recorded before the Investigating Officer as and when he is called. Petitioner No.2 (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.

¶13

(Brij Raj Singh, J.) (Vivek Chaudhary, J.)

¶14

Order Date :- 20.6.2024 Arnima

¶15

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

Akhilesh Agnihotri in Fir Abhishek Agnihotri @ Lucky and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akhilesh Agnihotri in Fir Abhishek Agnihotri @ Lucky and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Santosh Yadav Alias Ismail @ Mohd. Adil vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. District Lko. and 3 Others

Shivam and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Ikbal Ahmad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Ibras Ali vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Virender Kumar Pandey and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others

Shivam and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others