BINDER ALIAS RAVINDER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was arrested in connection with F.I.R. No. 66 dated 27.2.96 for the offence under Sections 363/366/376 of the Indian Penal Code. The F.I.R. is registered at Police Station City Bhiwani. In the F.I.R., it has been stated by the complainant that his daughter, Bhagwati, aged about 12-13 years has been inticed by the petitioner and after taking her to Durga Colony and they went to some unknown place. This occurrence is of 24.2.1996 at about 9.00 A.M. It has been found after enquiry from the house of the petitioner that he too was absent from the house with effect from that date. It is further stated by him that he has been searching his daughter on his own accord but her where- abouts could not be ascertained and he has filed the complaint for taking necessary action and for recovering his minor daughter and punishing the petitioner.

(2.) It is contended by the petitioner that the petitioner has contracted a valid marriage with Bhagwati who is above the age of 18 years on that day. The marriage was conducted in a temple. The petitioner has also mentioned in his petition that the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhiwani has recorded the statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate is quoted in the petition. In his order, he has said that an application has been moved by Smt. Bhagwati for recording her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and her statement has been recorded. She has stated that she is of the age of 18 years and she is married with the petitioner and that they remained as husband and wife for the last two months. Learned C.J.M. has further ordered that the matter was still in controversy and she was ordered to be in the custody of Nanak Chand, father of the petitioner.

(3.) Learned Advocate for State of Haryana has stated that after this statement before the learned C.J.M, further statement of prosecutrix has been recorded in which Bhagwati has stated that the petitioners after giving her threats has got her statement made through his lawyer. She has further stated that she was afraid of her parents, brothers and sisters. However, it is not shown as to why she should have been afraid of her parents, brothers and sisters. Without further going into the merits, the question is whether the petitioner should be released on bail or not will have to be considered.