Kuldeep Kumar @ Kuldeep Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:20293

Court No. - 14

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2789 of 2025

Applicant :- Kuldeep Kumar @ Kuldeep Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Suraj Singh Visen,Divyanshu Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Aman Kumar Shrivastav

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the private respondent, learned AGA for the Staterespondents and perused the record.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C/528 BNSS has been filed with the following main reliefs:

¶8

"Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that the Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash/set aside the Impugned Chargesheet No. 1 dated 30.07.2021 arising out of case crime no. 578/2020 under section- 376, 313, 356, 504, 506 I.P.C. P.S. Para, District Lucknow as well as summoning order dated 03.01.2022 passed by J.M.-I, Lucknow passed in case no. 2768/22 State vs Kuldeep Yadav passed in aforesaid case. As well as quash the criminal proceedings of case crime no. 578/2020 under section-376, 313, 356, 504, 506 I.P.C. P.S. Para, District Lucknow, (State versus Kuldeep Yadav) pending before special chief judicial magistrate custom Lucknow passed in aforesaid case, in the interest of justice, contained as Annexure No. 1 & 2 to this petition."

¶9

The facts of the case are that the respondent no. 2 lodged an FIR dated 18.10.2020 under Sections 376, 313, 356, 504, 506 IPC against the applicant alleging therein that the applicant has exploited her physically and outraged her modesty by giving a false promise of marriage. The police after investigation had filed a charge sheet against the applicant under Sections 376, 313, 356, 504, 506 IPC. During the pendency of the criminal case, the respondent no. 2 got married on 29.12.2020 with the applicant in Arya Samaj Mandir and filed the photographs of marriage annexed as Annexure-4 to the application. Thereafter they registered their marriage on 30.12.2020 under the Uttar Pradesh Marriage Registration Rule, 2017 and certificate of marriage issued by the Marriage Registrar Officer annexed as Annexure-5 to the application.

¶10

Today a supplementary affidavit has been filed bringing on record a copy of verification report dated 7.4.2025 of marriage certificate issued by the Marriage Registrar Offier, Sadar, Lucknow annexed as Annexure SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit.

¶11

In the present case, the respondent no. 2 has filed a counter affidavit on 4.4.2025 wherein in paragraph no. 5, an averment has been made that the respondent no. 2 was pressurizing the applicant to get married immediately and when he refused her, she had lodged the FIR. The contents of paragraph no. 5 of the counter affidavit is quoted hereinbelow:

¶12

"5. That the contents mentioned in paragraph-5 of the petition are accepted, and it is also necessary to mention here that the deponent was fully adult at the time of the alleged incident and was capable of thinking and understanding and the deponent had established physical relations with the petitioner with her own will and consent, after establishing physical relations with the petitioner, the deponent asked the petitioner to marry her immediately, then the petitioner procrastinated in getting married and said that he will get married after some days, but even after some time passed, the petitioner did not marry to the deponent. After which the deponent has lodged the impugned First Information Report against the petitioner on 18.10.2020 saying that the petitioner kept forcibly having physical relations with the deponent for about 4 years continuously by deceiving the deponent under the pretext of marriage. It is also necessary to mention here that after registration of the First Information Report, the deponent with her own will and consent, solemnized marriage to the petitioner on 29.12.2020 at Arya Samaj Mandir, Sector-H, Aliganj, Lucknow, after Hindu customs and taking Saptapadi Ceremony, and after marriage the deponent is living with the petitioner as his wife and is spending a happy married life with the petitioner."

¶13

The respondent no. 2 has also brought on record the dependent identity card issued by the concerned department of the applicant in favour of the respondent no. 2 showing therein the respondent no. 2 as wife of the applicant. The relevant para 13 of the counter affidavit is quoted hreinbelow:

¶14

"13. That the contents mentioned in paragraphs 14 to 21 of the petition are true and admitted and precedings paras of this counter affidavits are reiterated, it is further submitted that in the independent identity card of petitioner issued by concerned department name of deponent has beenmentioned as wife of petitioner. A copy of independent card is being filed herewith as Annexure No. CA-1. "

¶15

Further an averment has been made in the counter affidavit that the deponent/respondent no. 2 are leading a happy married life.

¶16

The applicant and respondent no. 2 are present before this Court in person, who have been identified by their respective counsels. The Court has asked respondent no. 2,

¶17

the complainant whether she is leading a happy married life with the applicant, she has replied that she is leading happy married life and she has no grievance or grudge against the applicant. She has further submitted that she does not want to pursue/proceed with criminal case filed by her against the applicant.

¶18

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgement dated 28.2.2025 passed in the case of Mahesh Mukund Patel Vs. State of U.P. and others (Criminal Appeal No. 001005 of 2025) has quashed the criminal proceedings in the matter pertaining to Section 376 and 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act on the pretext that the appellant and the respondent are leading a happy married life and having children. The relevant paragraph nos. 7, 8 and 9 of the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is quoted hereinbelow:

¶19

"7. Now that the appellant and third respondent are happily married, no purpose will be served by continuing the prosecution as it will cause undue harassment to the appellant, the third respondent and their children.

¶20

8. Coming to the impugned order, we find that the marriage certificate was placed on record before the High Court. In fact, no objection by the first informant is also recorded in the impugned order. Surprisingly, the High Court instead of entertaining the petition for quashing on the ground of settlement, has observed that the application for dropping criminal proceedings on the basis compromise may be moved before the Trial Court. The High Court completely lost sight of the fact that the Trial Court could not have recorded the settlement and in fact, this was a fit case for the High Court to have exercised its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. by quashing the proceedings. Unnecessarily, the parties have been forced to come to this Court.

¶21

9. The impugned order is set aside. FIR No. 567 of 2016 registered with Cholapur Police Station, District Varanasi and proceedings of the Sessions Trial No. 1332 of 2021 pending before the Special Judge, POCSO Act, Varanasi are hereby quashed."

¶22

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, discussion made hereinabove and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed and the criminal proceedings of Case Crime No. 578 of 2020 under Sections 376, 313, 356, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Para, District Lucknow as well as summoning order dated 3.1.2022 passed by J.M.-I Lucknow in Case No. 2768 of 2022 are hereby quashed.

¶23

Order Date :- 10.4.2025 AKK

¶24

Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Kuldeep Kumar @ Kuldeep Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldeep Kumar @ Kuldeep Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Nakul Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Juvenile X (Now Major ) in Pocso Case No 571 of 2021 Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Ramji Lal and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Jagdish Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Sunil Kumar Alias Sunil Kumar Chaurasiya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Arif and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. (Home) Lko. and Another