HARI OM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No. 0457/2017, PS Jaitpur, registered under Sec. 363 IPC and under Sec. 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, (POCSO) Act. The petitioner no.1 is the husband of the prosecutrix. Petitioner no.2 is sister of petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.3 is brother-in-law of petitioner no.1 and they have not been chargesheeted but they are shown in column 12 of the chargesheet submitted by the investigated agency.

(2.) Status report has been filed on behalf of the State reiterating that the FIR was registered on the complaint of father of prosecutrix/respondent no.2, who had stated that her daughter aged 16 years was missing on 20/6/2018. Later on, complainant brought his daughter to police station where her statement under Sec. 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded, wherein she stated that she liked the present petitioner no.1 and wanted to marry him but her parents were not willing to get her married to him. So, she eloped with him and got married in Lucknow and thereafter they made physical relations with each other. In her statement under Sec. 164 Cr.P.C. recorded before the MM, the prosecutrix stated that she had left house of her parents as they were not ready to perform her marriage with the present petitioner no.1. On the basis of date of birth mentioned in the school records, the prosecutrix was a minor at the time of marriage. On 31/8/2018, a female child was born to the prosecutrix. The petitioner was arrested on 9/9/2018. The charge-sheet was filed against petitioner no.1 after completion of investigation. Since there was insufficient evidence against petitioner no.2 and 3 so, they were kept in column No.12 of charge-sheet. The prosecutrix did not support the case of the prosecution in her examination in chief and thereafter her cross-examination was done. The petitioner was granted interim bail.

(3.) During arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the coordinate bench of this Court under the similar circumstances, has already quashed the FIR vide order dtd. 21/2/2022 in Crl.M.C. 27/2022 titled "Kundan and Anr. Vs. State and Ors.". The relevant portion of the said judgment is quoted hereunder:-