High Court · 2025

1. Shri Jay Shanker Shukla, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of respondent no. 2 and filed counter affidavit, which is taken on record.

2. Heard Shri Rajiva Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Jay Shanker Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 and Shri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

3. Present case has been preferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C/528 B.N.S.S. with following main prayer:- "Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed in the interest of justice that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this petition Us 482 Cr.P.C. r/w 528 B.N.S.S. and quash the entire criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner in the court of Learned Sessions Judge, Balrampur arising out of Sessions Trial No. 110/2024, Crime No. 16/2024, U/s 366, 376 I.P.C., Police Station-Gaidas Bujurg, District-Balrampur as well as the impugned charge sheet and summoning order dated 30-10-2024, contained as Annexures No. 1 and 2 to this petition.

4. The brief facts of the present case are that an FIR dated 25.02.2024 has been lodged by respondent no. 3-complainant against the applicant under Sections 363 and 366 IPC alleging therein that at midnight of 24.02.2024, she found that her daughter aged about 20 years was missing and the complainant was sure that she was enticed away or eloped by a person whose name is not known to her but with whom her daughter used to talk at telephone.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the Police after investigation has filed the charge sheet against the applicant under Sections 366 and 376 I.P.C. after recording the statement of victim-respondent no. 2 under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and the Court concerned took cognizance and issued summoning order against the applicant and feeling aggrieved by the same, the present application has been preferred for quashing of the entire proceedings.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant and respondent no. 2 have jointly submitted that the applicant had not enticed away the respondent no. 2 rather she on her own sweet will had gone with the applicant and thereafter, they got married on 26.02.2024 and the same was registered before the Marriage Registration Officer on 01.03.2025 and the certificate of registration of marriage is already on record at page no. 78 of the paper-book.

7. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the respective parties that the applicant and the respondent no. 2 are leading a happy married life but the complainant i.e. mother of the respondent no. 2/victim just for her pride and honour fraudulently implicated the applicant in this criminal case.

8. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 has submitted that the statement of respondent no. 2 under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded under pressure of her parents and the society. This fact may be verified from the agreement dated 04.03.2025 entered into between the applicant and the respondent no. 2, which is annexed at page no. 97 of the paperbook, whereas the statement of victim-respondent no. 2, which was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was actually her correct statement wherein she has deposed before the Police that she on her own sweet will had gone with the applicant and there was no allegation of any offence made out under Section 376 I.P.C.

9. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 has further submitted that the respondent no. 2 is major aged about 20 years at the time of incident, as per the version of complainant/mother of the victim/respondent no. 3 made in the FIR.

10. He has further submitted that as per the educational documents, which Police gathered from educational institution wherein date of birth of the victim is shown as 25.11.2005 meaning thereby at the time of alleged incident, the respondent no. 2-victim was 19 years of age and it is a settled proposition of law that a major woman can take her own decision.

11. It is further submitted that the applicant and the respondent no. 2 are now living a happy married life.

12. Learned counsel for the parties have relied upon a decision dated 28.02.2025 rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mahesh Mukund Patel Vs. State U.P. & others (Criminal Appeal No. 001005/2025). The relevant extract of the said judgment is being reproduced hereinbelow:- "7. Now that the appellant and third respondent are happily married, no purpose will be served by continuing the prosecution as it will cause undue harassment to the appellant, the third respondent and their children.

8. Coming to the impugned order, we find that the marriage certificate was placed on record before the High Court. In fact, no objection by the first informant is also recorded in the impugned order. Surprisingly, the High Court instead of entertaining the petition for quashing on the ground of settlement, has observed that the application for dropping criminal proceedings on the basis compromise may be moved before the Trial Court. The High Court completely lost sight of the fact that the Trial Court could not have recorded the settlement and in fact, this was a fit case for the High Court to have exercised its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. by quashing the proceedings. Unnecessarily, the parties have been forced to come to this Court.

9. The impugned order is set aside. FIR No.567 of 2016 registered with Cholapur Police Station, District Varanasi and proceedings of the Sessions Trial No.1332 of 2021 pending before the Special Judge, POCSO Act, Varanasi are hereby quashed."

13. In the aforesaid case, whose facts are almost similar as that of present case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has quashed the proceedings. In the said case, the provisions of POCSO Act were also leveled against the accused persons therein.

14. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 has further submitted that at present, the victim i.e. respondent no. 2 is living with the applicant and after marriage she does not want to proceed or appear in the matter pending before the trial court for recording her testimony.

15. On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted that the victim i.e. respondent no. 2 has recorded her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. which makes out a case under Section 376 IPC but unable to dispute the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and respondent no. 2.

16. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, going through the record of the case and the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in the case of Mahesh Mukund Patel (supra), it is found that admittedly, the victim-respondent no. 2 was major at the time of alleged incident and has solemnized marriage with the applicant on 26.02.2024, which has subsequently been registered on 01.03.2025 and the certificate issued by the Marriage Registration Officer is already on record.

17. As far as, the objection of learned AGA regarding the statement of respondent no. 2/victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is concerned, the same has been explained in para no. 25 of the accompanying affidavit filed along with the application. For convenience, the said para is reproduced hereinbelow:- " 25. That the victim has also executed a notarial affidavit dated 4-3-2025 in which she has stated on oath that she is a major woman. She had gone with the petitioner out of her own free will without any coercion and she has performed marriage with the petitioner and their marriage has also been registered by Marriage Registration Officer, Tehsil-Sadar, District- Sultanpur and she has been happily living with the petitioner as his legally wedded wife. In this affidavit she has stated that her mother i.e. the informant had lodged the F.I.R. Crime No. 16/2024, U/s 363, 366 I.P.C., Police Station-Gaidas Bujurg, District-Balrampur on false allegations and she had given her statement U/s 164 Cr.P.C. levelling false allegations against the petitioner under the pressure of the informant and other family members and the local police which was not her voluntary statement. Through this affidavit the victim has prayed for quashing of the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner in the court of Learned Sessions Judge, Balrampur arising out of S.T. No. 110/2024, Crime No. 16/2024, U/s 366, 376 I.P.C., Police Station-Gaidas Bujurg, District-Balrampur. Original affidavit dated 04.03.2025 executed by the victim is being annexed herewith as Annexure no. 20 to this petition."

18. The said para no. 25 has been replied in para no. 4 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no. 2-victim, which is reproduced hereinbelow:- " That the contents of paras 5 to 30 of the petition are admitted."

19. Further, the respondent no. 2-victim has made averment on oath in para no. 7 of the counter affidavit filed today that she had gone with the applicant out of her own free will and shown her desire that the present proceedings drawn against the applicant may be quashed. The said para no. 7 is being quoted hereinbelow:- "7. That it is very respectfully submitted that the victim/opposite party no. 2 is a major woman. She had gone with the petitioner out of her own free will and she has performed marriage with the petitioner out of her own free will without any coercion and she has been living with the petitioner as his legally wedded wife. The petitioner has committed no offence and entire criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner in the court of Learned Sessions Judge, Balrampur arising out of S.T. No.110/2024, Crime No. 16/2024, U/s 366, 376 I.P.C., Police Station-Gaidas Bujurg, District-Balrampur as well as the impugned charge sheet and summoning order dated 30-10-2024 are liable to be quashed in the interest of justice."

20. In view of the facts, circumstances and discussion made hereinabove and considering the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mahesh Mukund Patel (supra), it is a fit case where the proceedings against the applicant pending before the trial Court is liable to be quashed, thus, the proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 110/2024, Crime No. 16 of 2024, U/s 366 and 376 IPC, Police Station Gaidas Bujurg, District Balrampur as well as the impugned charge sheet and summoning order dated 30.10.2024 pending before learned Sessions Judge, Balrampur are hereby quashed.

21. For the foregoing reasons, the present case is hereby allowed. Order Date :- 24.4.2025 Ashish ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Shri Jay Shanker Shukla, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of respondent no. 2 and filed counter affidavit, which is taken on record.

2. Heard Shri Rajiva Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Jay Shanker Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 and Shri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

3. Present case has been preferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C/528 B.N.S.S. with following main prayer:- "Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed in the interest of justice that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this petition Us 482 Cr.P.C. r/w 528 B.N.S.S. and quash the entire criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner in the court of Learned Sessions Judge, Balrampur arising out of Sessions Trial No. 110/2024, Crime No. 16/2024, U/s 366, 376 I.P.C., Police Station-Gaidas Bujurg, District-Balrampur as well as the impugned charge sheet and summoning order dated 30-10-2024, contained as Annexures No. 1 and 2 to this petition.

4. The brief facts of the present case are that an FIR dated 25.02.2024 has been lodged by respondent no. 3-complainant against the applicant under Sections 363 and 366 IPC alleging therein that at midnight of 24.02.2024, she found that her daughter aged about 20 years was missing and the complainant was sure that she was enticed away or eloped by a person whose name is not known to her but with whom her daughter used to talk at telephone.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the Police after investigation has filed the charge sheet against the applicant under Sections 366 and 376 I.P.C. after recording the statement of victim-respondent no. 2 under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and the Court concerned took cognizance and issued summoning order against the applicant and feeling aggrieved by the same, the present application has been preferred for quashing of the entire proceedings.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant and respondent no. 2 have jointly submitted that the applicant had not enticed away the respondent no. 2 rather she on her own sweet will had gone with the applicant and thereafter, they got married on 26.02.2024 and the same was registered before the Marriage Registration Officer on 01.03.2025 and the certificate of registration of marriage is already on record at page no. 78 of the paper-book.

7. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the respective parties that the applicant and the respondent no. 2 are leading a happy married life but the complainant i.e. mother of the respondent no. 2/victim just for her pride and honour fraudulently implicated the applicant in this criminal case.

8. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 has submitted that the statement of respondent no. 2 under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded under pressure of her parents and the society. This fact may be verified from the agreement dated 04.03.2025 entered into between the applicant and the respondent no. 2, which is annexed at page no. 97 of the paperbook, whereas the statement of victim-respondent no. 2, which was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was actually her correct statement wherein she has deposed before the Police that she on her own sweet will had gone with the applicant and there was no allegation of any offence made out under Section 376 I.P.C.

9. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 has further submitted that the respondent no. 2 is major aged about 20 years at the time of incident, as per the version of complainant/mother of the victim/respondent no. 3 made in the FIR.

10. He has further submitted that as per the educational documents, which Police gathered from educational institution wherein date of birth of the victim is shown as 25.11.2005 meaning thereby at the time of alleged incident, the respondent no. 2-victim was 19 years of age and it is a settled proposition of law that a major woman can take her own decision.

11. It is further submitted that the applicant and the respondent no. 2 are now living a happy married life.

12. Learned counsel for the parties have relied upon a decision dated 28.02.2025 rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mahesh Mukund Patel Vs. State U.P. & others (Criminal Appeal No. 001005/2025). The relevant extract of the said judgment is being reproduced hereinbelow:- "7. Now that the appellant and third respondent are happily married, no purpose will be served by continuing the prosecution as it will cause undue harassment to the appellant, the third respondent and their children.

8. Coming to the impugned order, we find that the marriage certificate was placed on record before the High Court. In fact, no objection by the first informant is also recorded in the impugned order. Surprisingly, the High Court instead of entertaining the petition for quashing on the ground of settlement, has observed that the application for dropping criminal proceedings on the basis compromise may be moved before the Trial Court. The High Court completely lost sight of the fact that the Trial Court could not have recorded the settlement and in fact, this was a fit case for the High Court to have exercised its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. by quashing the proceedings. Unnecessarily, the parties have been forced to come to this Court.

9. The impugned order is set aside. FIR No.567 of 2016 registered with Cholapur Police Station, District Varanasi and proceedings of the Sessions Trial No.1332 of 2021 pending before the Special Judge, POCSO Act, Varanasi are hereby quashed."

13. In the aforesaid case, whose facts are almost similar as that of present case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has quashed the proceedings. In the said case, the provisions of POCSO Act were also leveled against the accused persons therein.

14. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 has further submitted that at present, the victim i.e. respondent no. 2 is living with the applicant and after marriage she does not want to proceed or appear in the matter pending before the trial court for recording her testimony.

15. On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted that the victim i.e. respondent no. 2 has recorded her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. which makes out a case under Section 376 IPC but unable to dispute the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and respondent no. 2.

16. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, going through the record of the case and the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in the case of Mahesh Mukund Patel (supra), it is found that admittedly, the victim-respondent no. 2 was major at the time of alleged incident and has solemnized marriage with the applicant on 26.02.2024, which has subsequently been registered on 01.03.2025 and the certificate issued by the Marriage Registration Officer is already on record.

17. As far as, the objection of learned AGA regarding the statement of respondent no. 2/victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is concerned, the same has been explained in para no. 25 of the accompanying affidavit filed along with the application. For convenience, the said para is reproduced hereinbelow:- " 25. That the victim has also executed a notarial affidavit dated 4-3-2025 in which she has stated on oath that she is a major woman. She had gone with the petitioner out of her own free will without any coercion and she has performed marriage with the petitioner and their marriage has also been registered by Marriage Registration Officer, Tehsil-Sadar, District- Sultanpur and she has been happily living with the petitioner as his legally wedded wife. In this affidavit she has stated that her mother i.e. the informant had lodged the F.I.R. Crime No. 16/2024, U/s 363, 366 I.P.C., Police Station-Gaidas Bujurg, District-Balrampur on false allegations and she had given her statement U/s 164 Cr.P.C. levelling false allegations against the petitioner under the pressure of the informant and other family members and the local police which was not her voluntary statement. Through this affidavit the victim has prayed for quashing of the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner in the court of Learned Sessions Judge, Balrampur arising out of S.T. No. 110/2024, Crime No. 16/2024, U/s 366, 376 I.P.C., Police Station-Gaidas Bujurg, District-Balrampur. Original affidavit dated 04.03.2025 executed by the victim is being annexed herewith as Annexure no. 20 to this petition."

18. The said para no. 25 has been replied in para no. 4 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no. 2-victim, which is reproduced hereinbelow:- " That the contents of paras 5 to 30 of the petition are admitted."

19. Further, the respondent no. 2-victim has made averment on oath in para no. 7 of the counter affidavit filed today that she had gone with the applicant out of her own free will and shown her desire that the present proceedings drawn against the applicant may be quashed. The said para no. 7 is being quoted hereinbelow:- "7. That it is very respectfully submitted that the victim/opposite party no. 2 is a major woman. She had gone with the petitioner out of her own free will and she has performed marriage with the petitioner out of her own free will without any coercion and she has been living with the petitioner as his legally wedded wife. The petitioner has committed no offence and entire criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner in the court of Learned Sessions Judge, Balrampur arising out of S.T. No.110/2024, Crime No. 16/2024, U/s 366, 376 I.P.C., Police Station-Gaidas Bujurg, District-Balrampur as well as the impugned charge sheet and summoning order dated 30-10-2024 are liable to be quashed in the interest of justice."

20. In view of the facts, circumstances and discussion made hereinabove and considering the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mahesh Mukund Patel (supra), it is a fit case where the proceedings against the applicant pending before the trial Court is liable to be quashed, thus, the proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 110/2024, Crime No. 16 of 2024, U/s 366 and 376 IPC, Police Station Gaidas Bujurg, District Balrampur as well as the impugned charge sheet and summoning order dated 30.10.2024 pending before learned Sessions Judge, Balrampur are hereby quashed.

21. For the foregoing reasons, the present case is hereby allowed. Order Date :- 24.4.2025 Ashish ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench