A & B Vs State The. N.C.T of Delhi (CRL.M.C. 283/2009) - Synopsis
Team SoOLEGAL 12 Nov 2020

In this case, A & B Vs State The. N.C.T of Delhi (CRL.M.C. 283/2009), the brief fact is that the petitioners got married under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, with the help of a lawyer and the lawyer directed them that the marriage ceremony should be completed at Arya Samaj Mandir and the registration of the marriage should be completed at Dwarka Court. On the given date the petitioners had reached Dwarka Court complex and they were informed by the lawyer that they need to wait for a few hours more. The petitioners decided to wait under a Delhi metro pillar. While they were waiting, they were taking pictures of themselves with their mobile phones and they were sitting together. After some time few police officials came and arrested the petitioners under section 294 of the Indian Penal Code and also accused them of kissing in a public place and many of the passersby were feeling disturbed. The petitioner’s lawyer reached the police station and the lawyer informed the petitioners that, they need to pay Rs 20000 to the police officials for not registering an FIR against the petitioners. The petitioners were also informed that if they don’t pay the amount then they will not be allowed to leave the police station. The petitioner’s lawyer had also informed the petitioners that an FIR against them would carry a punishment of imprisonment for a time period of three years. The petitioners were surprised and as there was no other option, the petitioners gave the amount to the police officials. However, the FIR was filed and surprisingly the lawyer of the petitioner charged more amount from the petitioners to reach an out of Court settlement. The petitioners discovered that they had been duped by the lawyer working in connivance with the police at the Dwarka Police Station.
The petitioners also stated that in the FIR which was registered by the police officials, not a single name of any passerby who was feeling disturbed has been mentioned and also not a single statement of any passerby has been recorded under section 161 of CRPC. The petitioners had lodged a complaint against the lawyer at the Bar Council of India.
The Court was of the view that, in Indian higher-level judiciary has not universally viewed public kissing as immoral. In an apt context, represented in different ways by the relevant judgments, it was seen as an act of affection, an expression of love and sympathy, and as defensible in its artistic depiction. Absent in both of these cases is a propensity to assume that any kiss is an act of sexual expression and that indulging in this act in public is often obscene. In view of the guarantee provided to the State by the learned lawyer, no clear guidance is given with regard to the completion of the disciplinary proceedings against the police officers involved. The petitioners are entitled to pursue all other remedies open to them by statute, including their appeal to the Bar Council of India.   

×

C2RMTo Know More

Something Awesome Is In The Work

0

DAYS

0

HOURS

0

MINUTES

0

SECONDS

Sign-up and we will notify you of our launch.
We’ll also give some discount for your effort :)

* We won’t use your email for spam, just to notify you of our launch.
×

SAARTHTo Know More

Launching Soon : SAARTH, your complete client, case, practise & document management SAAS application with direct client chat feature.

If you want to know more give us a Call at :+91 98109 29455 or Mail info@soolegal.com