Shiv Kumar Vs the State of U.P and Anr.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1537 of 2014

¶3

Shiv Kumar

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus The State Of U.P And Anr. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shailesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Govt. Advocate, Anil Kumar Tiwari

¶6

Court No. - 14

¶7

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

¶8

On 03.09.2025, the following order was passed:-

¶9

"1. Vakalatnama, on behalf of opposite party no. 3, has been filed by Shri Anil Kumar Tewari, Advocate and the same is taken on record.

¶10

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶11

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the FIR has been lodged by father of the alleged victim and the notice was issued and that too has been served upon opposite party no. 2 but neither he nor his counsel has ever appeared. He argued that the alleged victim was admittedly 17 years and 03 months old at the time of alleged incident as is evident from the high school certificate cum mark sheet wherein the date of birth of the alleged victim is mentioned as 25.09.1995. He submits that the applicant and the opposite party no. 3-victim have performed marriage and they are living as husband and wife and there are three children from their wedlock.He added that allowing the impugned proceeding to run further would be harassment of the applicant and, therefore, the same may be quashed.

¶12

4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.3 has supported the version of learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

5. Learned A.G.A., appearing for the State, has opposed on merits but he has no objection if the parties are major and have performed marriage.

¶14

6. For the foregoing reasons and to ensure truthfulness of the compromise deed entered into between the parties on 02.05.2025, the applicant and opposite party no. 3 are directed to remain present before this Court on 23.09.2025 at 2.15 p.m.

¶15

A482 No. 1537 of 2014

¶16

2

¶17

7. List/put up this matter on 23.09.2025 at 2.15 p.m., reflecting name of Shri Anil Kumar Tewari, as learned counsel for the opposite party no. 3.

¶18

8. Respective counsels shall inform this order to the applicant and the opposite party no. 3.

¶19

9. Till the next date of listing, the further proceeding of Case No.4144/2013, arising out of Case Crime No.0266/2012, U/Ss. 363 and 366 IPC lodged at Police Station Sangipur, District Pratapgarh, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 10, Pratapgarh shall remain stayed. "

¶20

In compliance of the order aforesaid, the applicant - Shiv Kumar and the opposite party no.3 - Smt. Nisha Verma alongwith three children are present before this Court and they have been identified by their respective learned counsels in the Court.

¶21

On query being asked, the opposite party no.3 replied that due to anonymity with the applicant, the FIR was lodged by her father. She submitted that she was major at the time of the incident and she has performed marriage with the applicant with her own sweet will and she has three children from their wedlock. She added that the criminal proceeding against the applicant may be dropped. The applicant has also reiterated the statement of the opposite party no.3.

¶22

The learned counsels for the parties have jointly prayed that since the applicant and the opposite party no.3 have performed marriage and they are living peacefully as husband and wife and there are three children from their wedlock, therefore, in the interest of justice, the criminal proceeding against the applicant may be quashed.

¶23

Considering the submissions of the parties, particularly the statement of the applicant and the opposite party no.3, this Court finds that the matter is covered with the ratio of judgment rendered in Vishwas Bhandari v. State of Punjab and another reported in (2021) 2 Supreme Court Cases 605, Criminal Appeal No.105 of 2021, dated 03.02.2021 , thus, the criminal proceedings of Case No.4144/2013, arising out of Case Crime No.0266/2012, U/Ss. 363 and 366 IPC, Police Station Sangipur, District Pratapgarh against the applicant, are hereby quashed.

¶24