SUSHILA YADAV AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME CIVIL SECRT. LKO. AND OTHERS
CRLP/1101/2024 · 2025-10-17
Rajnish Kumar, Zafeer Ahmad
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 190094 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 190094 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1101 of 2024 Court No. - 10 HON'BLE RAJNISH KUMAR, J.
HON'BLE ZAFEER AHMAD, J.
1. Case called out. 2. No one is present on behalf of the parties whereas learned A.G.A. for the State is present. 3. This Court passed the following order on 16.02.2024:-
"(1)Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. who appears on behalf of the State- Respondent nos.1, 2 & 3. (2) This petition has been filed by the petitioners for the following main prayer:-
"(i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the impugned First Information Report dated 29.01.2024 lodged by the Opposite party no.4 in F.I.R./ Case Crime No.24 of 2024, under Section 363 I.P.C. at Police Station Gomti Nagar Vistar, District Lucknow, as contained in Annexure No.3 to the writ petition." (3) Issue notice to the respondent no.4 returnable at an early date. (4) The petitioner shall take steps within one week. (5) The office shall indicate the matter to be listed on 05.04.2024. (6) It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the Petitioner no.1 - Sushila Yadav and the Petitioner no.2 Pankaj Kumar, both are major and had performed marriage with each other out of their own sweet will at Arya Samaj Mandir, Kamta, Chinhat, Lucknow, on 06.02.2024. The Opposite party no.4, who is the mother of the Petitioner no.1, is not happy with this marriage, as a result of which, the impugned FIR has been lodged against the petitioners in order to harass them. (7) This Court having considered the F.I.R. and also the surrounding facts as mentioned in the writ petition is, prima facie, of the opinion that the case requires consideration. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ravi Dwivedi, Ambrish Kumar Dwivedi, Kuldeep Kaur Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Sushila Yadav And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.
And Others .....Respondent(s)
(8) Till the next date of listing or till submission of the Police Report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., if any, before the Competent Court, whichever is earlier, the arrest of the petitioner no.2, namely, Pankaj Kumar, in pursuance of the First Information Report dated 29.01.2024 lodged by the Opposite party no.4 in F.I.R./ Case Crime No.24 of 2024, under Section 363 I.P.C. at Police Station Gomti Nagar Vistar, District Lucknow, shall remain stayed, of course, subject to the restraint that the petitioner shall fully cooperate with the investigation and shall appear as and when called upon to assist in the investigation. (9) The Petitioner no.2- Pankaj Kumar, is directed to produce the Petitioner no.1- Sushila Yadav, before the S.H.O. concerned who shall ensure that her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is recorded by the Competent Court within one week of her production before him. 3. Learned A.G.A., on the basis of instructions received from Sri Arjun Singh, Sub Inspector, Police Station Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow submits that final report dated 07.03.2024 has been submitted, therefore, this petition has lost its efficacy. The said instructions are taken on record. 4. In view of above, the petition has been rendered infructuous. 5. Dismissed accordingly. 1 October 17, 2025 Shahnaz CRLP No. 1101 of 2024 2 (Zafeer Ahmad,J.) (Rajnish Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAHNAZ BANO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench