BHRAMARBAR MOHANTY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this application under Section 482, Cr. P. C. petitioners pray to quash the order of cognizance taken by learned S. D. J. M., Athagarh in G. R. Case No. 179 of 2000.

(2.) ADMITTEDLY , petitioners are accused persons in G.R. Case No. 179 of 2000 of the Court of S.D.J.M., Athagarh. Cognizance of the offence under Section 366/34, I.P.C. has been taken on the basis of the investigation made on the F.I.R. of the informant who is the father of the girl who was allegedly kidnapped. The informant, alleged that this minor daughter aged 15 years was enticed away by the petitioners. On completion of investigation charge sheet was submitted for the aforesaid offence and on perusal of the evidence on record learned S.D.J.M. took cognizance of the said offence and issued process against the petitioners.

(3.) IN the case of Liaquat Hussen (supra) it was the admitted position on record, as noted in the cited decision, that by the date of alleged kidnapping the woman was 19 years old and the prima facie materials available on case diary was sufficiently indicating that she voluntarily walked away from the paternal home. Under such circumstance, a case of kidnapping or abduction was found not made out and the criminal proceeding was quashed. Such is not the circumstance so far as the present case is concerned. In this case, as admitted by the petitioners, the school leaving certificate of the girl shows that she was a minor i.e. aged about 15 years by the date of occurrence. The informant has also described that his daughter was fifteen years old. Therefore, keeping in view the provision in Section 361, IPC read with the relevant penal provisions in the Penal Code, in this case voluntariness in the action of the minor girl cannot be equated with the fact and the ratio in the case of Liaquat Hussen.