DILBAR HABIB SIDDIQUI Vs. STATE OF UP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Dilbar Habib Siddiqui, the petitioner, has invoked our extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of The Constitution of India for the relief to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned FIR, Annexure 4, dated 17.3.2010, of Crime No.136 of 2010, under Sec.323, 366, 363, IPC, P. S. Naini, District Allahabad, with additional ancillary prayer for a writ of mandamus commanding respondent police personnels not to interfere in his peaceful matrimonial life with Smt. Khushboo Jaiswal, daughter of respondent No.3, in pursuant to the impugned FIR, till submission of an opinion/report under Sec.173 (2) Cr. P. C., commonly known as charge sheet against him.

(2.) Incapisulated, factual matrix of the writ petition are that informant respondent no.3 Smt. Sunita Jaiswal is the mother of Khushboo Jaiswal, who was born on 15.3.1991, as is recorded in her Admit Card of High School Examination, issued from Board of High School and Intermediate Examination, Annexure No.1. Claim of the petitioner is that because of lust and greed for economic benefit, parents of khushboo Jaiswal wanted to solemnise her marriage with an aged individual and therefore Khushboo Jaiswal embraced Muslim religion and contracted marriage with the petitioner on 29.12.2009 and got a Nikahnama, Annexure-3, executed by kazi and Vakeel. Rankled by inter caste wedlock. the displeased parents of khushboo Jaiswal resorted to harassing tactics and as a step thereof lodged the impugned FIR on 17.3.2001 of Crime No.136 of 2010, under Sections 323, 366, 363, IPC, P. S. Naini, district Allahabad. which FIR, is now prayed to be quashed by the petitioner through instant writ petition as police of P. S. Naini, district allahabad was endeavouring to apprehend the petitioner in the aforementioned crime number. Writ Petitioner's further pleadings are that when Khushboo Jaiswal gained knowledge about the impugned FIR, she dispatched representations to higher authorities through registered post, a copy of which is appended as annexure-5 to this writ petition but without any relief.

(3.) At the time of admission of this writ petition, Sri Vedmani Tiwari, advocate appeared for the informant mother Smt. Sunita Jaiswal and objected to the admission of this writ petition. In midst of hearing one Smt. Hassibunnisa also appeared before us alongwith her three children and opposed any relief being granted to the petitioner as she claimed that she is the first legally wedded wife of the petitioner with whom she has three issues. She further informed us that the petitioner deals in human trafficking by indulging into matrimony with various girls and then leaving them as destitutes. On query being made by us from the petitioner, he also admitted present Smt. Hassibunnisa to be his wife. Since we were of the opinion that to do complete justice it is uneschewable legal imperative to hear smt. Hasibbunnissa, we directed the petitioner to implead her as a respondent in the instant writ petition and consequently she is now respondent No.4 in this writ petition. Respondent No.4 expressed her inability to engage a counsel for her self and her children because of financial constraints and economic hardship, therefore, in fitness of things, we permitted Sri Vedmani Tiwari, at his and her request, to plead for her as well. Smt. Hassibunnisa has filed a counter-affidavit in the writ petition to which no rejoinder affidavit has been filed by the petitioner's counsel.