SATPAL Vs. MAMTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present case is a tale of a man who claiming himself to be a staunch follower of God Hanuman with divine powers comes into contact with the family of a girl with power to heal all kinds of pains and sufferings and by misusing his influence, taking advantage of his fiduciary relationship makes an innocent girl to fall in his trap to dissuade her from her relationship with a man of her liking and age and adopts immoral and fraudulent tricks taking advantage of the feeble and innocent mind of a girl under depression; exploits his fiduciary status of a Godman; indulges in unreasonable exploitation affecting not only the life of the innocent girl but to spoil the same by forcing the relationship of husband and wife by imposing the relationship developed by act of fraud and undue influence. An attempt by the respondent to get out of the trap has been strongly resisted by the appellant by making all out efforts to sustain the relationship in a clandestine manner.

(2.) The present appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment and decree dated 16.9.2017, passed by Ms.Aaradhna Sawhney, Additional District Judge, Chandigarh, by virtue of which the petition filed by the respondent under Section 12 (c) of the Hindu Marriage Act , has been allowed.

(3.) Respondent Mamta, aged about 23 years, filed a petition for nullity of the marriage pleading that she got married to the appellant on 23.1.2015, as per Hindu Rites at Chandigarh, in presence of a priest Sh.Amar Lal. The appellant had started visiting the house of the respondent in the year 2010 claiming himself to be a healer having divine powers being staunch follower of God Hanuman. The family of the respondent came in contact with him through the brother of father of the respondent who further came in contact through one of his relations who had bestowed utmost faith in the appellant and his healing powers as per the tradition in the country of people having faith in Godman and Bhagats and treated the appellant like a Godman Hanuman having diving powers to heal all kinds of problems including physical pain and sufferings. The appellant used to give sermons to the gathering at various places. Though the appellant was resident of Haryana, but he used to visit Chandigarh, often giving prior intimation to all the relatives of respondent's family and on account of his said influence, he came closer to the family of the respondent. He would accompany the family of the respondent to various religious places like Mansa Devi and Mata Vaishno Devi shrine and used to attend the functions in the family. He used to address the respondent as 'Beti' and she would discuss all the personal matters like her fears, her studies, her dreams and future and professional career. Respondent was also in contact with one Sandeep Sharma her class fellow in one Institute namely Gynam, Sector 34, Chandigarh, where she was taking coaching for competitive exams for competing in her BCA. The said classmate of the respondent became her friend. They used to share study materials as well as personal thoughts. The respondent disclosed all the facts regarding her liking for Sandeep Sharma to the appellant but the appellant objected to said feelings and friendship on the ground that it is not acceptable in the Indian Society. The appellant insisted that her friendship with Sandeep Sharma would lead her to destruction and loss of her reputation and dignity. The appellant had taken mobile number of Sandeep Sharma on the pretext that he would try to ascertain his character and reputation. The appellant visited the house of the respondent and disclosed about Sandeep Sharma having not good character and being guilty of soliciting the innocent girls and using them for ulterior motives. The appellant claimed that he had enquired about the said boy from his native village at Village and Post Office, Dhakal, Tehsil Narwana, District Jind and he had done the similar mischief by making MMS of some girls and then blackmailing them for ulterior motives. The respondent was shocked to hear said claims of the appellant and as she has immense faith in the appellant, she readily accepted the same and promised not to keep any contact with Sandeep Sharma. However, after few days, the appellant again visited the house of the respondent and revealed a shocking fact that Sandeep Sharma had already made a video wherein she had been found in a compromising position with him and was ready to blackmail her. The respondent told the appellant that she had never indulged in any kind of physical relationship, as such question of video recording does not arise. Appellant insisted that there was possibility that Sandeep Sharma might have taken photographs from his mobile and then used the same to make fake video recording in order to blackmail her and warned the respondent against Sandeep Sharma. Although the respondent had not indulged in any physical intimacy with Sandeep Sharma but still she fell in the trap of appellant under the under blind belief as she considered that the appellant could not lie being a Godman. Persuaded by the false representations of the appellant, the respondent went into extreme depression and lost control over her mind and sense of rational thinking and completely surrendered herself before the appellant and pleaded to get her out of that situation. Respondent disconnected herself from Sandeep Sharma and started remaining in extreme depression and tension throughout the day. The respondent was very much attached with her family and had shared every sorrow and happiness with them but she cold not share the incident on the warning given by the appellant. She had thought of committing suicide. Under the said thought, the respondent approached the appellant for committing suicide in order to save the honour of the family. At that point of time, the appellant again represented himself to be a saviour being a Godman and told the respondent to surrender herself to him so that he can make a very easy and safe path for her to get out of said situation. The appellant told her that it would be best for her to get married with him and then to ran away to some undisclosed place and then allow her to commit suicide so that the family of the respondent would remain under impression that she was living happily at her matrimonial home. The appellant justified the said plan by projecting that by said act, the respondent would fulfill her desire to commit suicide and at the same time would keep her family under impression that she was alive and must be enjoying the matrimonial life at some place. The respondent was not in her senses and was devoid of rational thinking as she readily agreed to whatever plan and path the appellant showed to her. The appellant took her to Mata Mansa Devi Temple at Panchkula and performed marriage ceremony after arranging a Purohit. He directed the respondent to withdraw money from her bank account so that they can execute the said plan smoothly after making necessary arrangements. The marriage ceremony was performed at Temple Bharmari Devi Jyoti Anusandan Centre, situated near Mansa Devi Temple, Panchkula and after that the respondent returned home but did not disclose anything about the marriage and the respondent continued to reside in Chandigarh as if nothing had happened. The appellant disclosed to the respondent that they had to file a case before the Punjab and Haryana High Court to take directions to the extent that family of both of them could not follow or trace them and they could manage to flee comfortably to some undisclosed place. Accordingly, the appellant took the respondent to some Advocate known to him and got some papers signed after which the case was filed in the High Court in which order of protection to both of them was passed. In the said case, the appellant had impleaded his family members only as the respondents without impleading the family members of the respondent. The appellant had shown his date of birth as 27.12.1983 instead of his actual date of birth as 4.8.1978.