Disposed

Ritesh Yadav and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC6 Dec 2024CRLP/9278/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous writ petition, the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad issued notice for counter affidavit and granted interim protection against arrest to petitioners, a married couple, while investigation proceeds into allegations alleging marriage against family wishes under IPC Sections 363 and 366.

What did the court decide?

Notice to state for counter affidavit; interim protection against arrest directed; marriage registration ordered.

Ritesh Yadav and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9278 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- Ritesh Yadav And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anubhav Awasthi,Anand Mishra,Kanh Kumar Awasthi,Shubham Kumar Verma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,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 03.11.2024 bearing Case Crime No.0456 of 2024 for the offence under Sections-363, 366 I.P.C. registered at Police Station-Dariyabad, District-Barabanki.

¶7

It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioner nos.1 and 3 are major and have married with each other by their own free will on 10.05.2024 as per Hindu Rites and Rituals in in Kotwa Dham Mandir, Barabanki. Submission of counsel for petitioners is that father of petitioner no.3 had earlier lodged an F.I.R. on 05.05.2024 bearing Case Crime No.363, 366 I.P.C., Police Station Tikait Nagar, District Barabanki in which after recording statement of petitioner no.3 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., Final Report has been submitted on 24.05.2024. In the Age Certificate issued by Chief Medical Officer, Barabanki the petitioner no.3 is found to be of around 18 years of age. The Age Certificate is annexed as Annexure No.6 to the writ petition. Further submission is that petitioner no.3 is also pregnant having pregnancy of 21 weeks. Photocopy of ultra-sound report of petitioner no.3 is annexed as annexure

¶8

no.7 to the writ petition. As per Aadhar Card, age of petitioner no.3 is 01.01.2006. As the marriage was against the wishes of the family members, therefore, it is alleged that the Police is harassing them at their instance.

¶9

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

¶10

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

¶11

List this case after four weeks.

¶12

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 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.3 before the magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.C.(now Section 183 B.N.S.S.). Thereafter, investigation shall be taken to its logical conclusion. Meanwhile, petitioner no.1 and 3 will also get their marriage registered before the Marriage Registration Authority under the U.P. Marriages Registration Rules, 2017 and produce the marriage certificate before this Court on the next date.

¶13

Order Date :- 6.12.2024 Arti/-

¶14

[Om Prakash Shukla,J.] [Vivek Chaudhary,J.]

¶15

Digitally signed by :- ARTI MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ritesh Yadav and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritesh Yadav and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 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

Sri Ketari vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Others

Arpit Giri and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Ram Mohan vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home , Lucknow and 7 Others

Roli Devi and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Vijay Kumar Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Deepmala and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Sectt. Lko. and 2 Others