MOHD SALMAN KHAN Vs. STATE OF U P
LAWS(ALL)-2018-9-163
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD (AT: STATE)
Decided on September 06,2018

Mohd Salman Khan Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF U P Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This petition seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing First Information Report No.330 of 2018, under Sections 364, 506 Indian Penal Code and Sections 16, 17 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Purakalandar, District Faizabad.
(2.) Order dated 19.7.2018 notices the gist of the issue raised by the petitioners. The order reads as under :- "1. This petition seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing First Information Report No.330 of 2018 under Sections 364, 506 Indian Penal Code and Sections 16, 17 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Purakalandar, District Faizabad. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contends that petitioner No.2 willingly got married to petitioner No.1. Petitioner no.2 has not been kidnapped. Offence in her context has not been committed. Evidence of marriage is available on record as Annexure-3. The marriage, however, has not been accepted by respondent No.4, therefore, in abuse of process of the law and process of the Court, impugned criminal proceedings have been initiated. 3. It has been pleaded that ingredients of Sections 364 and 506 Indian Penal Code are not satisfied. 4. We have also taken into account the fact that petition has been filed, also on behalf of the alleged victim of offence which would prima facie demonstrate that offence of kidnapping/abduction has not been committed. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has argued that the case is squarely covered by judgment dated 23.7.2015 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.3519 (M/B) of 2015: Shaheen Parveen and another versus State of U.P. and others. 6. Issue notice to serve respondent No.4, returnable on 06.09.2018 7. List on 06.09.2018. 8. The petitioners shall not be taken in custody, till the next date of listing. The petitioners are directed to join investigation. 9. Investigating officer of the case is directed to ensure that statement of petitioner No.2 is recorded under Section 164 Criminal Procedure Code. Let medical age of the victim be verified. 10. Let counter affidavit be filed."
(3.) Learned counsel for the respondent State on the basis of written instructions taken on record, has clarified that respondent no.4 Israr Ahmad has been served and notified that the case would be listed. We however find that neither respondent no.4 has appeared in court nor he is represented through counsel.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.