Sudheer Gupta @ Sudhir Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Court No. - 27

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6669 of 2025

Applicant :- Sudheer Gupta @ Sudhir Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhaker Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

Vakalatnama filed by Sri Vivek Chandra, Advocate on behalf of respondent nos.2 and 3 is taken on record. Office is directed to show his name as the counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3 in the cause list.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3.

¶7

The instant application has been filed by the applicant praying as under:-

¶8

"To quash the entire proceeding of session trial No. 3654/2023, arising out case crime No. 71/2023, under section-363,366,376 IPC & 3/4 POCSO Act, relating to Police Station- Jankipuram, District- Lucknow, (State Versus Sudheer Gupta), pending in the Court of Learned Spl. Judge POCSO Act II, Lucknow as well as the impugned charge sheet submitted by the Investigating Officer and also quashing the impugned summoning order dated 14-12-2023, passed by the Spl. Judge POCSO Act, Lucknow, in the interest of justice, contained as Annexure No.1 & 2 to this petition."

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim was willing to enter into marriage with the applicant, but her family members were against her wishes. When the victim pressurized her family members to fulfill her wishes, she was beaten brutally by her brothers, due to which, she left her house on her own wish and thereafter entered into marriage with the applicant on 03.04.2023.

¶10

It is further submitted that the F.I.R. of the case in question was lodged against the applicant on the basis of incorrect facts. During the course of investigation, statements of victim were recorded u/s 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., in which, she categorically denied the prosecution story. However, the charge-sheet was submitted by the Investigating Officer without considering statements of the victim.

¶11

It is next submitted that the applicant and the victim are enjoying their matrimonial life and presently, they have one

¶12

daughter aged about one and a half years as such trial of the case would be futile one. The complainant of the case is mother of the victim and she also does not want to prosecute the applicant as she has signed the settlement dated 11.07.2025, hence, the entire proceedings are liable to be set aside.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of the applicant and submits that charge-sheet has already been filed and at the time of incident, the victim was minor. However, he does not dispute the fact that the victim has not supported the prosecution story in her statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C., in which, she stated that she entered into marriage with the applicant on 03.04.2023 and she left her house on the ground that she was being beaten brutally by her brothers.

¶14

Learned counsel for the complainant does not contradict the arguments as advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. He submits that the victim is enjoying her matrimonial life with the applicant and she has one daughter aged about one and a half years. He prays for quashing of the impugned proceedings.

¶15

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the petition, statements of the victim recorded u/s 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., it is apparent from the statements of the victim recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. that she was being beaten brutally by her brothers, as a result, she left her house and then solemnised marriage with the applicant on 03.04.2023 and she categorically denied the prosecution story. In such circumstances, the matter requires consideration.

¶16

8. List this case on 02.09.2025 within top ten cases.

¶17

In the meantime, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant may file counter affidavit.

¶18

The impugned proceedings shall remain stayed till further order.

¶19

Order Date :- 14.8.2025 Arpan

¶20

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

Sudheer Gupta @ Sudhir Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudheer Gupta @ Sudhir Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 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

Similar cases

Amit vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Afsari Begum vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Imran Ahmad vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Deepak Kuamr Srivastava vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Smt. Asha Devi and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Saddam Hussain and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another