High CourtsSingle Bench(2025) 06 UK CK 0429

Aawesh Malik And Another vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 4 June 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
Pankaj Purohit, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (Crl) No. 542 Of 2025

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 280 words

Pankaj Purohit, J

1.

As per office report certain defects are pointed out regarding illegibility of page nos.22, 23, 37 and 38 of the paper book.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that typed copies of these pages are already on record.

3.

I have perused the file and found the contention made by counsel for the petitioner to be correct.

4.

Accordingly the defects pointed out by the Registry are overruled.

5.

By means of the present writ petition, the petitioners have put to challenge the F.I.R. No.205 of 2025 dated 10.05.2025, under Sections 376, 498-A and 506 of IPC registered with Police Station Patel Nagar, District Dehradun.

6.

It is contended by counsel for the petitioners that petitioner no.1-husband has solemnized marriage with respondent no.3-informant on 24.01.2024 on which date both were major. The F.I.R. was lodged after a long period of time on 10.05.2025 leveling serious allegations against the petitioner no.1 of committing rape when she was minor.

7.

It is further contended by counsel for the petitioners that petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 were in love, therefore, after attaining the age of majority they solemnized marriage.

8.

Per contra, State counsel submits that there are serious allegations against petitioners; therefore, the case is such where no interference is required.

9.

I have perused the F.I.R. and have gone through the file meticulously. The case is not such as reflected by counsel for the petitioner. There are serious allegations of committing rape and unnatural sex with respondent no.2 by petitioner nos.1 and 2, who is father-in-law of respondent no.2, therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter.

10.

Accordingly writ petition stands dismissed.