Allahabad High Court
Taranpreet Kaur And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 5 November, 2019
Author: Naheed Ara Moonis
Bench: Naheed Ara Moonis
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 46 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 23413 of 2019 Petitioner :- Taranpreet Kaur And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J.
Hon'ble Anil Kumar-IX,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State.
By means of the present writ petition, the petitioners have invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the FIR lodged at Case Crime No. 200 of 2019, under Sections 504, 363 and 366 IPC, police station Milak Khanam, district Rampur.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has identified petitioner No. 1, Smt. Taranpreet Kaur, who is present before this Court.
It is submitted that petitioner No. 1, Smt. Taranpreet Kaur has voluntarily performed marriage with petitioner No. 2, Prabjeet Singh out of her own free will and they are leading happy married life. Respondent No. 3, who is the bother of petitioner No. 1 has lodged the first information report on absolutely false and vague allegations that his sister has been enticed away by petitioner No. 2 in association with petitioners No. 3 to 5, who are family members of petitioner No. 2. The entire prosecution case is based on fabricated facts so as to wreck personal animus while prima facie no cognizable is made out. Hence, the impugned F.I.R. on the basis of false allegations made in the first information report lodged by respondent No. 4 is liable to be quashed. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that petitioner No. 1 is major as per marks sheet of Secondary School Examination in which her date of birth has been mentioned as 27.7.1999.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. contended that the allegations made against petitioner No. 2 cannot be aborted at this stage. There is complicity of petitioner Nos. 3 to 5 also in the commission of the offence. They are involved in serious offence and, therefore, they do not deserve any indulgence.
From the bald perusal of the FIR, prima facie cognizable offence is made out against petitioner Nos. 2 to 5 at this stage, hence, there is no ground to interfere with the FIR. Therefore, the prayer for quashing the impugned FIR or quashing of their arrest is refused.
However, considering the entire facts and circumstance of the case, the investigating officer of the case is directed to get the statement of petitioner No. 1 under Section 164 Cr.P.C. recorded by producing her before the Magistrate concerned within two weeks from today. The petitioner No. 1, Smt. Taranpreet Kaur shall not be subjected to any harassment or embarrassment during the intervening period.
It is further directed that petitioner Nos. 2 and 5 shall not be arrested in the aforesaid crime till the submission of the report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C, subject to restraint that they shall cooperate with the investigation.
This writ petition is disposed of as above.
Order Date :- 5.11.2019 Ishrat