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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:49504

¶2

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

(Lucknow)

Court No. - 27

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3161 of 2024

¶7

Applicant :- Gautam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Pal Singh,Ambrish Kumar

¶8

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anurag Singh

¶9

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶10

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the victim.

¶11

2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.723 of 2023, State vs. Gautam, arising out of impugned charge sheet no.A227/2023, dated 03.06.2023 filed in Case Crime No.0212 of 2023, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C., Section 3/4 POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act, Police Station Payagpur, District Bahraich.

¶12

3. On 12.08.2025, following order was passed :-

¶13

" An affidavit alongwith the Vakalatnama filed by Sri Anurag Singh, Advocate on behalf of the victim is taken on record.

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anurag Singh, learned counsel appearing for the victim and the learned AGA for the State.

¶15

The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to quash the chargesheet No. A-227 of 2023, dated 03.06.2023 filed in Crl. Case No. 723 of 2023; State Vs. Gautam, arising out of Case Crime No. 0212 of 2023, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act and Sections 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Payagpur, District Bahraich and summoning order dated 21.07.2023 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Bahraich as well as entire proceedings in pursuance thereof.

¶16

It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the First Information Report was lodged by the father of the alleged prosecutrix, though there is no such incident has ever happened and because of anguish with the love affair of his daughter/victim with the applicant, the First Information Report was lodged and the applicant is roped in the same. He also submits that the medical examination report of the victim, appended as Annexure no. 5 to the application, is apparent that the age of the victim was 18 years at the time of incident and, therefore, she was major and, thus, there was no question to charge Section 3/4 of POCSO Act. He next submits that the alleged victim has performed the marriage with the applicant and she is living with him on her own sweet will and there is no dispute in between the prosecutrix and the applicant. He next added that if the criminal proceedings against the applicant would not be quashed, the marital life of the parties shall be ruined. Thus, submission is that the criminal proceedings against the applicant may be quashed.

¶17

Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party has supported the version of learned counsel for the applicant. In view of the aforesaid and for ascertaining the truthfullness with respect to the marriage and willingness of the prosecutrix with the applicant, the applicant as well as the alleged prosecutrix, namely, Mamta are directed to remain present before this Court on 22.08.2025 at 02:15 p.m.

¶18

List/put up this case on 22.08.2025 at 02:15 p.m.

¶19

The respective counsel for the parties are directed to communicate this order to the applicant and the prosecutrix."

¶20

4. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the applicant as well as the victim are present before this Court. The victim has categorically stated that she was willing to enter into marriage with the applicant, which was not accepted by her family members. Consequently, she left her parental home and joined the company of the applicant and subsequently, they entered into marriage. However, due to annoyance, the F.I.R. in question was lodged.

¶21

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant and the victim are enjoying their matrimonial life and they have one child. Therefore, the trial of the case in question would be futile and there is no possibility of conviction in the present case. Hence, the aforesaid impugned proceedings may be quashed.

¶22

6. Learned counsel for the victim has submitted that the victim is enjoying her matrimonial life; therefore, the impugned proceedings may be quashed.

¶23

7. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of learned counsel for the applicant and has submitted that after investigation, the charge sheet was submitted.

¶24

8. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the application as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that notice was issued to the complainant/opposite party no.2, who is the father of

¶25

the victim, despite service, he has not responded. In the ossification test, the age of the victim was found to be 18 years. As the victim herself admitted before this Court that she is enjoying her matrimonial life with the applicant, this Court is of the view that the trial of the case in question would be futile.

¶26

9. Accordingly, the instant application is allowed . Consequently, the entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No.0212 of 2023, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C., Section 3/4 POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act, Police Station Payagpur, District Bahraich are hereby quashed.

¶27

10. Office is directed to communicate this order to the trial Court concerned.

¶28

(Rajeev Singh, J.)

¶29

Order Date :- 22.8.2025 A.Dewal

¶30

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH DEWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Gautam v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gautam v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ramji Singh Pno- 852090046 vs State of U.P. Thru. Addt. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Manmeet Singh vs Allahabad High Court Thru. Registrar General and 2 Others

Smt. Kalawati Devi and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Manoj vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. U.P. and Another

Sohan @ Sohan Lal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Nagar Vikas Lko. and 4 Others