SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ajay @ Bhura And 7 Others vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 25 February, 2020


?Court No. – 48

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. – 3391 of 2020

Petitioner :- Ajay @ Bhura And 7 Others

Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Anshul Nigam,Rekha Singh

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

Hon’ble Pritinker Diwaker,J.

Hon’ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

Heard Sri Anshul Nigam, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Amit Sinha, learned AGA for the State.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking quashment of FIR dated 26.03.2019 lodged by respondent no.3 in respect of Crime No.134 of 2019 for the offence under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Iglas, District Aligarh.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that marriage of petitioner no.1 was solemnized with respondent no.3 on 22.02.2016 and without any reason, she left the house of the petitioners on 26.12.2016. On 09.01.2017, a report was made by petitioner no.1 to the concerned SSP and on 10.01.2017, an application was filed by petitioner no.1 against the respondent no.3 under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Age.

A request was also made by the petitioners for mediation at Mahila Police Station, but yield not result. On 18.03.2017, respondent no. 3 filed reply to the application filed under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act in which she has categorically stated that she is not interested to live with petitioner no.1 and she also prays for divorce. Respondent no.3 also filed an application under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act claiming maintenance pendente lite. On 15.12.2018, respondent no.3 filed an application for filing FIR and in the meanwhile, mediation before police also failed. Learned counsel submits that the present FIR is nothing, but an after thought and has been filed just to blackmail the petitioners. The petitioner no.1 is husband of respondent no.3; petitioner no.2 is brother-in-law (jeth); petitioner nos.3 and 4 are sisters-in-law (jethani); petitioner no.5 is brother of petitioner no.4; petitioner nos.6 and 7 are sisters-in-law (nanad) and petitioner no.8 is step brother-in-law (chachera jeth) of respondent no.3.

On the other hand, learned AGA opposes the petition.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioners, we are not inclined to quash the criminal proceedings.

However, we finally dispose of this petition with a direction to the State authorities that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners in respect of above stated crime number till the submission of charge sheet under Section 173 (2) of Cr.P.C. before the court concerned.

It is made clear that this order would remain effective till the petitioners cooperate in the investigation.

Order Date :- 25.2.2020




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Copyright © 2022 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation