Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RINKU versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Rinku v. State Of U.P. & Others - CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. 1841 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 4767 (28 February 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon.Amitava Lala,J.

Hon.Shiv Shanker,J.

Since both the boy and girl as well as  the complainant, respondent no.4, Pratap  are present before this Court and identified by their learned counsel. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the girl Rajo is major and her age proof certificate is available as Annexure-4 to the writ petition wherein we found, as per radiologist report, that Rajo is  above 19 years. At page 36, Annexure-5 to the writ petition, the statement of the girl  was recorded before the Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein she  stated that she  does not want to go with the petitioner but want to go back with her father. She has also stated that she was taken forcibly through Jeep. She was also stated that she has no love/affection with the boy.

In the presence of the parties, we asked the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner to ask a question to the girl that whether she wants to go with the boy or live with father whereupon she stated specifically in the open Court that she wants to go with her father.

After considering the pros and cons of the matter, we are of the view that we cannot pass any favourable order  in favour of the petitioner.

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, we are of the view that the concerned F.I.R., should not be interfered with in the present case particularly on the basis of the guidelines framed by the Supreme Court in the case as reported in AIR 1992 SC 604 (State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others).

Therefore, the writ petition stands dismissed.

No order is passed as to costs.

However, in case petitioners/petitioner appear or produce before the court concerned and apply/applies for bail in connection with Case Crime No. 1086  of  2005, under Sections 363 and 366 I.P.C., Police Station Mandawar, District Bijnor, the same shall be decided in accordance with law.

Dt.28.2.06

Asha

W.P.1841/06


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.