MANISHA SHUKLA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the parties.

(2.) IN both the petitions, the prayer is the same i.e. for quashing of the F.I.R. being Kotwali (Sukhdev Nagar) P.S. Case No. 947/2007, registered under Sections 364/366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code at the instance of Sushil Kumar Shukla who has been made as a party respondent no. 7 in the W.P. (Cr.) No. 54 of 2008 and Respondent NO.3 in Cr. M.P. No. 619 of 2008.

(3.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that her father has lodged an F.I.R. with Kotwali (Sukhdev Nagar) P.S. making false and frivolous allegation against the respondent nos. 4, 5 and 6 to the effect that she has been kidnapped and abducted by the accused persons. She further stated that as a matter of fact, she has left the house of her father at her own. 5. The father of the girl Sushil Kumar Shukla i.e. respondent no. 7 in the W.P.(Cr.) No. 54 of 2008 and Respondent No. 3 in Cr. M.P. No. 619 of 2008, has filed a counter affidavit wherein, he has stated that the marriage certificate annexed with the petition is forged and fabricated documents and as a matter of fact, his daughter is in illegal detention and confinement of the respondent nos. 5 and 6 and she has serious threats of her life at their hands and she has filed this application under pressure and being in the clutches and custody of the criminals. 6. A counter affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the Investigating Officer. 7. Since the investigation of the case registered on the basis of the F.I.R. lodged by the informant, has already been taken up and as per the counter affidavit of the Investigating Officer, the allegations made in the F.I.R. have been found to be correct against the accused persons and therefore, we are of the view that the Police should be given liberty to reach to a logical conclusion in the matter and to submit the Final Form under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C. The petitioners as well as the respondent nos. 4 and 5 i.e. the accused in this case are directed to cooperate with the investigation and if they apprehend of being arrested, they may take recourse of law available to them. In our view, no case at all is made out for quashing of the F.I.R. However, the respondent Superintendent of Police as well as the O/C are directed to see that every protection to the life of the girl Manisha be given to her if she asks for the same in writing and if it is found to be necessary. 8. Accordingly, both the petitions are dismissed having found no merit.