PRAKASH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These criminal misc. petitions have been preferred by the petitioners against the order dated 01.10.2014 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sojat, District Pali whereby applications preferred by both the petitioners for handing over the custody of respondent No.2 Sayeta to her husband and her father have been rejected.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on the basis of a report lodged by Bhola Ram S/o Shri Jora Ram (petitioner in Criminal Misc. Petition No.2510/2014), an FIR No.141/2014 dated 2.9.2014 at Police Station Sojat, District Pali was registered against Prakash (petitioner in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.2846/2014) and his father and mother. In the said FIR, Bhola Ram has alleged that on 22nd of August, 2014, when he went to his agriculture field, at about 1:00 PM Prakash and his father Rajuram came to his house and abducted his minor daughter with intention to marry her with Prakash. It is alleged that when he returned back from the agriculture field, his wife informed him that their daughter did not return back since afternoon and thereafter he searched her at the places of his relatives and other places, but he could not find her. It is alleged that his daughter was in illegal custody of accused persons and they have refused to release her from their illegal custody. It is also alleged that when he went to his village Ajeetpura, all the accused persons threatened and challenged that they got his daughter married with Prakash. It is also alleged that when the complainant visited the residence of accused persons, his daughter Sayeta was crying there and asked him to release her from their illegal custody. It is also alleged that petitioner-Prakash has sexually assaulted his daughter from last 5-6 days.

(3.) On receiving the said report, the police registered the above mentioned FIR against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376, 342 and 120-B I.P.C. and police started investigation. During the course of investigation, the respondent No.2 was recovered on 18.9.2014 by the police and produced before the trial court. When the respondent No.2 refused to go with her father, she was sent to Nari Niketan. Thereafter applications for handing over custody of respondent No.2 were moved on behalf of both the petitioners and same were dismissed by the court below vide order dated 1.10.2014.