SURENDRA YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties. The petition seeks quashing of the order dated 22.12.2008 by which the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Barh, Patna directed the framing of charges under sections 363, 365 and 494 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners in Barh P.S. Case No. 307 of 2007 (G.R. No. 1024 of 2007).

(2.) The allegation contained in the F.I.R. was that the petitioners had taken and enticed away the wife of the informant, who was aged 36 years and was mother of his two children. It was further stated that the purpose for taking and enticing away the lady, inter alia, was also to sell the land which was standing in the name of the lady on account of being given to her by her parents out of love and affection.

(3.) It appears that the lady appeared in the Court and her statement was recorded under section 164 of the Cr. P.C. and she stated that the complainant/informant used to ill treat and torture her so much so that she was beaten up very often. On one such occasion, she was not only beaten up but was also driven out of her house by her husband and out of frustration, she came to the railway station, caught a train and went to Mathura where she was enga ed in sellin vegetables. She had gone to Deoghar from Mathura and she came to learn from a lady that a man had been remanded to custody on the complain of her husband who was alleging that the man had taken or enticed away the lady, i.e. Indu Devi and as such, she came to Court where the police took her in custody. In her statement she stated that none had abducted or kidnapped her and she had gone to Mathura out of her own free will and was desirous of going back to that place as she had become habituated of living harsher life. She stated that she does not have any relationship with petitioner Surendra Yadav nor there had been any filing with time.