AJAY AGRAWAL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings including the order dtd. 4/6/2016 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga by which cognizance has been taken against the petitioners for the offence under Sec. 363/370/374/325 of the I.P.C and Sec. 4/14 of the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 in connection with Ahtu Lohardaga P.S.Case No.05 of 2016, corresponding to G.R.Case No.145/2016, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Lohardaga in S.T.No.88/2016. On the written report of Mr. Karmu Kherwar, the F.I.R was registered alleging therein that his daughter Rajmuni Kherwar who was 10 years of age, was taken by the present petitioners on the pretext of providing her proper education. The present petitioners took the permission of her grandfather. She was brought on 19/2/2016. The informant further stated that he went twice to the house of the present petitioner to check the whereabouts of her daughter but the petitioner said that he has no information with respect to the girl. On 6 th March, 2016, the son of the informant went to the house of the present petitioners and insisted to meet his younger sister and asked her to return home. The petitioners locked the victim in a room and it was further alleged by the informant that the child was not accorded proper behaviour and was not fed properly. Lastly, the informant stated that the victim tried to flee from the premises of the present petitioners on 8 th March, 2016 and in the attempt doing so, she got her left leg fractured.

(2.) Mr. Nilesh Kumar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the penalty has already been provided under the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986. He submits that when the special Act is there, the I.P.C will not apply and it is well settled law. He further submits that in view of sub Sec. (3) of Sec. 14(D) of the said Act, the case is compoundable. He further submits that Sec. 3 of the said Act provides that once the matter is compounded, no prosecution shall be instituted. On this ground, he submits that the entire criminal proceeding is fit to be quashed. He further submits that in terms of order dtd. 10/3/2016 of the Child Welfare Committee a sum of Rs.20,000.00 has been paid to the victim.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the O.P.No.2 submits that it is an admitted fact that Child Welfare Committee at Lohardaga directed by order dtd. 10/3/2016 to pay a sum of Rs.20,000.00 to the victim and the same has been paid, however, the F.I.R has been lodged on 12/3/2016 and lodging of the F.I.R is not restricted.