DESHRAJ Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant Deshraj as well as the prosecutrix Babli along with their child Jatin Bansal aged 1 1/2 years, are present in person, identified by their respective counsel. Heard on IA No.6622/13 an application on behalf of the applicant to implead the aforesaid Babli as respondent No.2 in the petition. Such application has been filed in compliance of some earlier direction of this court dated 15.3.13. On consideration, such IA is allowed and the applicant's counsel is directed to implead the name of said Babli as respondent No.2 on the record. With permission of the court such name has been incorporated as respondent No.2 on the record by the applicant's counsel. The same is certified accordingly. Also heard on IA No.6265/13 an application on behalf of the applicant to place the annexed affidavit of respondent No.2 Babli on record. For the reasons stated in it, such document appears to be relevant with the matter,hence by allowing the IA, such affidavit is taken on record. State counsel submits that he is under receipt of the case diary. Looking to the nature of the case and the question involved in the petition as also in view of availability of the case diary, instead to hear the same on the question of admission, with the consent of the parties, this petition is heard for final adjudication. 1. The applicant, alleged accused has filed this petition under section 482 of the Cr.P.C for quashment of the FIR registered as Crime No.750/09 against him at police station Cantt, Sagar for the offence punishable under section 363 and 366 of the IPC. As alleged, he had kidnapped the respondent No.2 Babli in her age of below 18 years without consent of her natural guardian, the parents, with intention to perform the marriage and physical relations with her. Before hearing the arguments of the counsel of the parties, I deem fit to verify the averments of the petition as well as avermetns of the aforesaid affidavit of Babli respondent No.2.

(2.) On asking the applicant with respect of the averments of the petition, he categorically stated that the petition has been drafted at his instructions as well as instructions of his wife Babli/respondent No.2. He also admitted that he got married with Babli on dated 10.10.2010 at some Shiv Temple, A-block, Shastri Nagar, Ghaziabad and in that connection some Hindu Marriage Bureau of Gaziabad has also given them a marriage certificate dated 8.4.2011 (Annx.P-4) which certifies that aforesaid marriage had taken place on the aforesaid date according to the record of their institution. He also stated that subsequent to aforesaid marriage, they have been blessed with a son, namely, Jatin Bansal on dated 5.7.11. His birth certificate is placed on the record as Annex.P/5. He further said that he got married with respondent No.2, contrary to the wish of their parents and other family members that is why after leaving their native place by both of them to perform the marriage, the father of respondent No.2 lodged a missing person report (Annx.P/1) at Police Station Cantt. Sagar on dated 24.10.2009 and during the course of its inquiry, the impugned crime No.750/09 (Annx.P/2) was registered on dated 10.11.09 against him and some other co-accused for the offence under section 363 and 366 of the IPC. He also argued that according to the school record of respondent No.2, she was aged 17 years, six months and eight days on the date when she left her parental home but on the date of marriage 10.10.2010, she became major and got married with him in accordance with the Hindu rites and rituals, as stated above.

(3.) Subsequent to aforesaid on verification from Babli/respondent No.2 present in person along with the aforesaid child, namely, Jatin Bansal, she categorically stated that she voluntarily came and went with the applicant Deshraj and after attaining the age of 18 years, with her own wish, got married with him on aforesaid date and manner stated by applicant and since the date of marriage they are residing together happily as husband and wife. Out of such wedlock, they have also been blessed with the child, namely, Jatin Bansal. She further stated that initially she wanted to marry with the applicant but her parents were not prepared so she went with the applicant and after attaining the age of 18 years, performed the marriage with him. She also verified the aforesaid date of their marriage and date of birth of their child. She further stated that her parents were not prepared to marry her with the applicant and that is why after leaving the home voluntarily by her, her father lodged the aforesaid missing person report with the police and on its inquiry, the above-mentioned offence was registered against the applicant. She further stated that if the impugned FIR and criminal case is not quashed and applicant is taken in custody and prosecuted then in that circumstance, her life along with her child shall be destroyed within a very shorter period from the date marriage and in that situation, she and her child has to face the dire consequences and their future shall become dark and prayed to allow this petition with appropriate direction to quash the FIR and its entire investigation proceedings.