PRALAYA RANJAN BHATTACHARYA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A. for the opposite parties.

(2.) APPLICANT No. 1 is an advocate of District Mirzapur, who claims to have married respondent No. 3, Kiran. It is alleged that the parents of the girl took away the girl from him and as such he filed a Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 463 of 2002, Smt. Kiran v. S.S.P., Mirzapur and others. On the directions of the Court, Kiran appeared and made a statement that she never married with Pralay Ranjan Bhattacharya. She also made a statement before the Court that she had not been detained by her parents against her will. Her statement was recorded on 24.1.2003, before this Court, which is as under :

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the applicants submits that the procedure prescribed in Section 340, Cr. P.C. has not been followed. Since no proceedings are pending before any Court, at present Section 340, Cr. P.C. will not apply in this case. LEARNED counsel for the applicants, however, contends that the girl has married with applicant No. 1 with her sweet will and she has also written several letters to applicant No. 1. The applicant No. 1 is innocent in the matter. Till the matter is decided by the Court it cannot be said that the applicant is guilty or not and whether he has got prepared forged documents or not.