Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Uttarakhand High Court

Rakib S/O Jabbar vs State Of Uttarakhand on 29 February, 2012

Author: Prafulla C. Pant

Bench: Prafulla C. Pant

   IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
                   NAINITAL
          Criminal Writ Petition No. 154 of 2012


   1.        Rakib S/o Jabbar
   2.        Israr S/o Manjora
   3.        Rashid S/o Jabbar
   4.        Hamid S/o Mustafa
             All R/o Kishanpur, P.S. Bhopa, District-
             Muzzafarnagar (U.P.)

                                                .........Petitioners
                             Versus

   1- State of Uttarakhand, through Secretary Home Affairs,
      Dehradun.
   2- Station House Officer, Police Station- Pathri, District
      Haridwar.
   3- Murtaza S/o Ali Hasan R/o Kishanpur, P.S. Bhopa,
      District Muzzafarnagar (U.P.)

                                                ......Respondents
Mr. K.S. Verma, Advocate, present for the petitioners.
Mr. M.A. Khan, Brief Holder, present for the State.

Hon'ble Prafulla C. Pant, J.

Heard.

2) By means of this petition moved under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioners have sought quashing of First Information Report, registered as Crime No.170 of 2011, relating to offences punishable under Section 372 and 506 of I.P.C., Police Station- Pathri, District Haridwar.

2

3) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the girl Sahista is present in the Court and she was not sold for prostitution purposes by any one.

4) Sahista, identified by her counsel on interaction told to this Court that she is major, aged 19 years. She further told that she got married to petitioner No.1 Rakib against the wishes of her stepfather Murtaza.

5) Learned counsel for the petitioners drew attention of this Court to the copy of Nikahnama, which is annexed as annexure No.2 to the writ petition, in support of the above facts.

     6)    Admit the petition.
     7)     Learned counsel for the State prays for and is

allowed four weeks' time to file the counter affidavit.

8) Issue notice to respondent no. 3 Murtaza, who may also file his counter affidavit within a period of four weeks.

9) Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State, and further considering that the girl present in the Court told that she got married to petitioner No.1 against the wishes of the complainant, as an interim measure, it is directed that petitioners namely Rakib, Israr, Rashid and Hamid, shall not be arrested in connection with First Information Report, registered as Crime No.170 of 2011, relating to offences punishable under Section 372 and 506 of I.P.C., Police Station- Pathri, District Haridwar, during investigation, provided they cooperate with the 3 investigating agency.(Stay Application No. 1359 of 2012, stands disposed of).

10) List after four weeks.

(Prafulla C. Pant, J.) 29.02.2012 JM