JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division
Bench of the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow
in Writ Petition No. 4120 (M/B) of 2005.
(3.) Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:
The aforesaid writ petition was filed by respondent No.1,
a practicing advocate in the High Court of Allahabad for
issuance of writ petition in the nature of certiorari for
quashing the FIR registered as Crime Case No.165/2005
under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short
the 'IPC') in Police Station, Krishna Nagar, Lucknow and for
certain other reliefs. It was stated that FIR dated 9.6.2005 was
lodged by Sardar Mahendra Singh- respondent No.2 at the
aforesaid police station. In the FIR it was stated that
respondent No.1 alongwith his mother and sister had
abducted daughter of respondent No.2 on 8.6.2005 at 7.30
p.m. After the FIR was lodged, police started investigation and
recorded the statement of wife of the complainant. Statement
of one Kamaljit Kaur was also recorded whose version was
same as that of Smt. Manjit Kaur. The statement of Jagjit
Kaur, aunt of the abducted girl was also recorded. On
20.6.2005 statement of Arun Kumar Singh was recorded by
the police. According to him at about 8.00 p.m. he had seen
the girl alongwith present respondent No.1-Nitin Agnihotri on
a rickshaw. The statements of Raj Kumar and Sanjeev
Sabarwal neighbours of the complainant were also recorded.
Father and mother of the accused were arrested by the police
on 21.6.05. The High Court by an interim order stayed the
further investigation in Crime Case No.165/05. By an order
dated 27.6.05 it further held that FIR against Nitin Agnihotri
by respondent No.2 was filed with oblique motive. The High
Court restrained the authorities and directed that they
should not interfere with the peaceful living of the accused
persons in connection with the FIR referred to above. The High
Court also directed grant of protection to Ms. Neena Agnihotri
and observed that she was free to go and stay at any place she
desired. A direction was given for her appearance on
25.6.2005 under police force protection. On 28.6.2005 the
High Court quashed the FIR and all consequential
proceedings including Crime Case No.165/05 pending before
learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate (Customs), Lucknow.
The accused persons in the FIR were directed to be set free
and the Judicial Magistrate was directed to take cognizance
under Section 181 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in
short 'the Code') against respondent No.2 for filing with
oblique motive the FIR. Before the said order was signed Ms.
Neena Arora complained that she was being threatened by
her-in-laws. The concerned Bench of the High Court was
again constituted and order was passed that Shri Manoram
Agnihotri and his wife were to be released, and security was to
be provided to Nitin Agnihotri and his wife and the authorities
were to ensure that the aforesaid persons were not harassed
in any way. The High Court thereafter in the concluding para
of the judgment held that it was a fit case where cost of
Rs.50,000/- was to be imposed against the State and
respondent No.2-the father of the girl. The High Court further
observed that imposition of cost on respondent No.2 would
create rift between the two families and cost should not be
paid by respondent No.2 on giving an undertaking that he
would re-concile to the situation.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.