AJIT SINGH RAJPUT Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition, the petitioner has written in the synopsis as under:-That on 8-4-2008 the daughter of the petitioner, namely roshan @ Chinki went to fill the form of B. Ed. but thereafter she did not return. She had a mobile with her bearing no. 9252489355. When she did not return then the petitioner tried to search her but he failed but he continued his search for his daughter. Thereafter the petitioner got the call details of the mobile numbers of his daughter and he came to know that after her missing, many of the calls are from the mobile Nos. of respondents Banshi Sihag and naveen Puniya. Then the petitioner on 8-8-2008 lodged an FIR against the respondents no. 4 to 7 before the police station Adarsh Nagar, Ajmer for the offence U/s. 366 and 363 IPC and along with the FIR the call details were also submitted. The said fir was registered as 113/2008 dated 8-8-2008. That the police started to investigate the matter and tried to search the daughter of the petitioner but she could not be found. That the respondents no. 4 and 5 filed a bail application before this Hon'ble Court bearing No. S. B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No. [2] DB Habeas Corpus Pet 6033/2009 6627/2008 (Banshi Lal Vs. State) and 6630/2008 (Naveen Punia vs State ). In that bail application on 24-9-2008 on that the I. O. was present in person and he submitted before the court that the narcotic test is required. Then the counsel for accused submitted that the accused are ready for narcotic test. On which this hon'ble Court accepted the prayer of the I. O. for narcotic test and directed the accused to make available for the said test. On perusal of the aforestated averments, we do not find it a case of an illegal confinement, but a case of either elopement or kidnapping. Police has registered the case under sections 366 and 363 IPC. No case for issuance of notice is made out. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed.