Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 157710 (ALL)

KM. PRATIBHA SINGH AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

CRLP/7453/2025 · 2025-08-27

Rajesh Singh Chauhan, S Q H Rizvi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7453 of 2025 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J. HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J. 1. Heard Sri Diwarkar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri S. N. Tilhari, learned AGA for the State and Sri Karuna Shankar Bajpai, learned counsel who has filed Vakalatnama today on behalf of opposite party No.4, same is taken on record. 2. By means of this petition, the petitioners have assailed the impugned FIR bearing FIR/Case Crime No.0426 of 2025, under Section 87 B.N.S. registered at Police Station- Maurawan, District Unnao. 3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that the petitioners are major persons have got married in one Hindu temple on 02.08.2025 and after the marriage they are living together as husband and wife. By means of Annexure No.4, colored photographs of the marriage has been enclosed. Further attention has been drawn towards Annexure- 5 which is an application being filed by the petitioner No.1 to the Superintendent of Police, Unnao apprising that she has got married with the petitioner No.2 and after the marriage, they are living together as husband and wife, therefore, their liberty may be protected. So as to show the age of the parties, High School Certificates of the petitioners have been enclosed wherein the date of birth of petitioner No.1 is indicated as 05.08.2001 and of petitioner No.2 is 11.07.1998. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that since the father of the petitioner No.1 is not agreeable on that marriage, therefore lodged the impugned FIR against petitioner No.2. Investigation is going on and the present petitioners are ready to cooperate in the investigation. 4. Per contra Sri Karuna Shankar Bajpai, learned counsel has vehemently opposed the aforesaid prayer by submitting that the petitioner No.2 has married to his niece and both belong to the same family and being blood relative that marriage is invalid as per Hindu law. One certificate being issued by Kshetra Panchayat, Mawai-6, Mawai, Hilauli, District Unnao has been produced by him, same is taken on record. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Diwakar Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Km. Pratibha Singh And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. Learned AGA has submitted that if the parties have got married, they may be directed to participate in the investigation proceeding and record their statements so that investigation could be conducted and concluded strictly in accordance with law. 6. Having considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material available on record, we are not inclined to keep this petition pending any longer but we are issuing the direction to both the petitioners to appear before the Investigating Officer on 01.09.2025 at 11.00 am. to record their statements. Their statements shall be recorded promptly and they shall not be held up in the police station unnecessary and after recording their statements they shall be permitted to leave the police station forthwith. In any case their cooperation is further required to the Investigating Officer, they shall again cooperate in the investigation till completion of the same and filing of the police report. 7. Keeping in a view the dictum of Apex Court in Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2006 (5) SCC 475, the present petitioners may not be harassed by the police in any manner whatsoever subject to their proper cooperation in the investigation. 8. It is also needless to say that since both have claimed themselves as husband and wife and said to have been living together from the date of marriage therefore they shall not be harassed by any of the authority viz police personnel or private person. 9. In view of the aforesaid term, the writ petition is disposed of finally. August 27, 2025 Reena/- CRLP No. 7453 of 2025 2 (Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.) (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench