Sarvesh v. The State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi & ORS.

$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 4084/2024 & CRL.M.A. 39355/2024 SARVESH .....Petitioner Through:

Ms. Rita Bhardwaj, Advocate.

versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

.....Respondents Through:

Ms. Priyam Agrawal, Advocate for Mr. Sanjay Lao, SC for R-1 & 2.

SI Arvind Kumar, PS Mandir Marg.

SI Neetu Kumar, PS Sikandarabad (UP)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

O R D E R

% 03.01.2025 CRL.M.A. 39355/2024 [Exemption from filing certified copies] 1.

Allowed, subject to just exceptions.

2.

The Application stands disposed of.

W.P.(CRL) 4084/2024 3.

Pursuant to the previous order dated 30.12.2024, SI Neetu Kumar (PNO 173190078), PS Sikandarabad, District Bulandshahr, UP is present in Court today along with Mr. Deepanshu Yadav and Ms. Roshil. 4.

The Court has interacted with Mr. Deepanshu Yadav and Ms. Roshil both of whom have attained age of majority. They state that they have married each other in Delhi. They further submit that they have married out of their own choice and wish to live with each other. 5.

SI Neetu Kumar states that Mr. Deepanshu Yadav and Ms. Roshil have not been taken into custody or arrested and that Mr. Deepanshu Yadav The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/01/2025 at 17:18:00

and Ms. Roshil are not required in the matter any further. 5.1 SI Neetu Kumar also states that the investigation is complete and they are in the process of filing a closure report in FIR No.1095/2024, P.S.: Sikandarabad, Uttar Pradesh.

6.

The father of Ms. Roshil and the mother of Mr. Deepanshu Yadav are also present in Court. The father of Ms. Roshil states that he has no objection if Mr. Deepanshu Yadav and Ms. Roshil live with each other and that he will withdraw his complaint filed with P.S. Sikandrabad, District Bulandshahar, Uttar Pradesh.

7.

The State has filed a status report in the matter. The same may be placed on record by the learned Standing Counsel for the State. 8.

In view of the statements of the SI Neetu Kumar and that of the father of Ms. Roshil (complainant in the UP case - FIR No.1095/24), learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that nothing further survives in the matter and that the Petition can be disposed of.

9.

Accordingly, the Petition is disposed of. Pending Applications, if any, stand closed.

10.

TARA VITASTA GANJU (VACATION JUDGE) ANISH DAYAL (VACATION JUDGE) JANUARY 3, 2025/ ha Click here to check corrigendum, if any The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/01/2025 at 17:18:00