Disposed¶15

Kallu @ Shakeel Ahmad and 7 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC17 Jun 2025CRLP/12248/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court interim protection from arrest; rape on false promise of marriage; distinction between rape and consensual sex; Case Crime No. 124 of 2024, P.S. Lohata, Varanasi; B.N.S. Sections 191(2), 64, 69, 109, 89, 127(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 118; Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.; Kallu @ Shakeel Ahmed v. State of U.P.; writ petition; order dated 17.6.2025; counter affidavits; ongoing investigation.

What did the court decide?

Interim protection from arrest granted; notice issued to respondent no. 4; respondents to file counter affidavits within four weeks, rejoinder within two weeks thereafter; case to be listed after six weeks. Matter remains pending. ¶15

Kallu @ Shakeel Ahmad and 7 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners, against whom petitioner no. 1 is alleged to have committed rape upon the prosecutrix on false promise of marriage in Case Crime No. 124 of 2024, are entitled to protection from arrest pending investigation and disposal of the writ petition.

¶6

Court's answer

The respondents are restrained from arresting the petitioners pursuant to the First Information Report dated 19.5.2025 (Case Crime No. 124 of 2024), subject to cooperation in the ongoing investigation.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

The interim protection from arrest operates till the next date of listing or till cognizance is taken by the court on the police report submitted under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., whichever is earlier.

¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Siddharth and Harvir Singh, JJ.), Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 12248 of 2025, interim order dated 17.6.2025: Petitioner no. 1 is alleged to have committed rape upon the prosecutrix on false promise of marriage; counsel contended false implication and urged that the distinction between rape and consensual sex, and between mere breach of a promise and a false promise made only to satisfy lust, required investigation before arrest. The court found the matter to require consideration, issued notice to respondent no. 4, and directed counter affidavits within four weeks and rejoinder within two weeks, listing the case after six weeks. Till the next date of listing or till cognizance on the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., whichever is earlier, the respondents are restrained from arresting the petitioners pursuant to FIR dated 19.5.2025 (Case Crime No. 124 of 2024) under Sections 191(2), 64, 69, 109, 89, 127(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3) and 118 B.N.S., P.S. Lohata, District Varanasi, subject to cooperation in the ongoing investigation.

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 12248 of 2025

¶3

Petitioner :- Kallu @ Shakeel Ahmad And 7 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Diwan Saifullah Khan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Hon'ble Harvir Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶6

There is allegation against the petitioner no. 1 of committing the offence of rape upon prosecutrix on false promise of marriage.

¶7

Counsel for the petitioner submits that it is a case of false implication of petitioners. There is clear distinction between rape and consensual sex. The court has to very carefully examine whether the accused really wanted to marry the victim or had malafide motives or had made false promise only to satisfy his lust. There is distinction between mere breach of promise and not fulfilling a promise. Whether the prosecutrix entered into physical relationship on account of love and passion for the petitioner or due to reason beyond his control, he was unable to marry her, despite best intention, are required to be investigated before arresting him and sending him to jail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A has opposed the submission of counsel for the petitioners.

¶9

Matter requires consideration.

¶10

Issue notice to the respondent no. 4.

¶11

Steps be taken within a week.

¶12

All the respondents may file their counter affidavits within four weeks. Petitioner may file rejoinder affidavit within two weeks thereafter.

¶13

List this case after six weeks.

¶14

Till the next date of listing or till cognizance is taken by

¶15

court on police report submitted under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., whichever is earlier, the respondents are restrained from arresting the petitioners pursuant to the First Information Report 19.5.2025, registered as Case Crime No. 124 of 2024, under Sections-191 (2), 64, 69, 109, 89, 127 (2), 115 (2), 352, 351 (3), 118 OF B. N. S., Police Station-Lohata, District-Varanasi, subject to cooperation in ongoing investigation.

¶16

Order Date :- 17.6.2025 HR

¶17

Digitally signed by :- HEMANT RANJAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kallu @ Shakeel Ahmad and 7 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kallu @ Shakeel Ahmad and 7 Others v. State of U.P. 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

Similar cases

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

Nitesh Gupta @ Nitesh Kumar Gupta @ Ankit Gupta vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mohammad Jelani and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Gulfam @ Chaudhary Gulfam and Another vs the State of U.P. and 3 Others

Tarkeshwar Pasi and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Imran @ Mohd Irfan vs State of U.P. and 2 Others