MANJU Vs. GOMTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Quashing of two FIRs bearing nos.64/2008 and 172/2008 registered under Section 363 of IPC at Police Station M.S. Park, North East, Delhi has been sought in this petition. Setting aside of impugned orders dated 5th June, 7th June, 21st June and 1st July, 2008 has been also sought. Petitioners are the prosecutrix and Rahul Kumar, petitioner no.2 who claims to have married the prosecutrix and the stand of both the petitioners is that petitioner no.1 i.e. the prosecutrix is major in age and she has married petitioner no.2 much against the wishes of respondent no.1 who is the mother of petitioner no.1 i.e. the prosecutrix. Although one Mukesh has been impleaded as respondent no.2 in this petition but it is not clear from the petition filed as to what is his role in this case.

(2.) Both the sides have been heard on this petition and with their assistance the material on record has been perused.

(3.) The crux of the case of the petitioners is that on 31st December, 2007 marriage of both the petitioners was solemnised in the presence of respondent no.1 and the said marriage was dowry less and thereafter both the petitioners were happily residing together. It is alleged in the petition that after few months of the marriage, the aforesaid two FIRs were got registered by respondent no.1 against petitioner no.2 with the sole motive to grab the property of petitioner no.2 which is worth Rupees Thirty Lacs. On 5th June, 2008, respondent no.1 had filed an application for taking custody of petitioner no.1 by contending that she is a minor and vide impugned order dated 5th June, 2008, the aforesaid application was allowed and custody of the prosecutrix was given to respondent no.1 i.e. her mother. However, vide order dated 7th June, 2008, learned Metropolitan Magistrate had ordered that the prosecutrix be sent to 'Nirmal Chaya' as she had stated that she is unable to live with her mother due to certain reasons. Again, vide order dated 21st June, 2008, it was ordered that the prosecutrix be sent to 'Snehalay', AGCR, Opposite Garg Nursing Home, Karkardooma, Delhi as prosecutrix was not willing to live in 'Nirmal Chaya'. Vide order dated 1st July, 2008, prosecutrix's revision petition was dismissed as withdrawn as she had made a statement in the Revisional Court that as per her school certificate, she will attain majority in age on 15th December, 2008 and till then, she may be kept at 'Snehalay', X-31, Karkardooma Institutional area, Delhi.