SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 2697

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA, J
Vanshika – Appellant
Versus
Gulshan Pawar – Respondent


Advocates:
Amar Singh Rathore,

ORDER

This is petition u/S.340 of Cr.P.C . for taking cognizance for offence u/Ss.195, 340 Cr.P.C against the respondent No.1 and 2 for the offence punishable u/Ss.177, 191, 196, 199, 200 and 209 of IPC .

2. Learned counsel for applicant submits that the petition was filed by Gulshan Kumar and Bhanupriya seeking police protection on the ground that they are major and they had married and living together with their free consent without any pressure. The family members of the petitioner are harassing and victimising them. Considering the aforesaid submissions, the said petition was disposed of by this court with a direction to the respondent No.1 and 2/petitioners in the said petition to approach the police authorities to verify the genuineness of the apprehension expressed and their marriageable age in accordance with law in terms of the decision by the Apex Court in the case of Latasingh Vs. State of U.P. (2006) 5 SCC 475 and also in the case of Shakti Vahini Vs. Union of India (2018) 7 SCC 192 . It is argued that along with the petition, the respondent No.1 Gulshan Kumar filed an affidavit stating that he is an adult and educated person and he is unmarried and it is his first marr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top