Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 175 (ALL)

MURARI v. STATE OF U. P.

2010-01-13

D.R.AZAD

body2010
JUDGMENT Hon’ble D.R. Azad, J.—Heard Sri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants as well as Sri Atul Srivatava, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A. G. A. and perused the material on record. 2. By means of this application under Section 482, Cr.P. C. the applicants have prayed for quashing the charge-sheet filed against the applicants in Case No. 304 of 2008 under Sections 363, 366, 368, 504 and 506 IPC, P. S.-Kotwali Nagar, District Bulandshahar arising out of Case Crime No. 466 of 2008. 3. The brief facts of the case is that the applicant No. 1 fell in love with the daughter of the complainant and got married in Arya Samaj Mandir on 20.3.2008. Thereafter on 20.5.2008 the respondent No. 2 lodged first information report under Section 363, 366 IPC at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Bulandshahar as Case Crime No. 466 of 2008. The said first information report was lodged against the entire family of the applicant No. 1. The applicants challenged the first information report dated 20.5.2008 by means of Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 8929 of 2008; Manoj and others v. State of U.P. and others. The applicant No. 1, Murari and his wife, Rajani Bharti appeared in person and this Court restrained the police from arresting the applicants. This Court vide order dated 5.6.2008 stayed the arrest of the applicants till the submission of the charge-sheet with the condition that the applicants/petitioner shall fully cooperate with the investigation and shall appear as and when called upon to assist in the investigation. 4. After usual investigation conducted by the police, a charge-sheet has been submitted on 11.6.2008 by the Investigating Officer and Magistrate has taken cognizance. The impugned charge-sheet and cognizance has been challenged by means of this application. 5. This Court vide order dated 14.10.2008 had directed that the alleged kidnapped girl, Rajani Bharti shall appear before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahar and move an application for recording her statement under Section 164, Cr.P.C., on that application a date shall be fixed, on that date respondent No. 2 and the Officer Incharge of the police station concerned shall be summoned who shall identify the girl, Rajani Bharti, after her identification she shall be examined by a board of doctors headed by the Chief Medical Officer, Bulandshahar to determine her age. Thereafter her statement under Section 164, Cr.P.C. shall be recorded. Thereafter her statement under Section 164, Cr.P.C. shall be recorded. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the statement of girl under Section 164, Cr.P.C. was recorded in presence of respondent No. 2 and after identification of the girl by police officer, medical examination of Rajani Bharti was conducted by the Board headed by the Chief Medical Officer, Bulandshahar. 6. A sealed envelop sent by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahar has been opened before this Court in the presence of Sri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Atul Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 and learned A. G. A. which contains statement of girl, Rajani Bharti recorded under Section 164, Cr.P.C. and medical certificate regarding her age. 7. In her statement under Section 164, Cr.P.C. recorded on 3.1.2009 she has clearly stated that she had gone out of her own free will with Murari on 20.8.2008 at Aligarh by bus. Murari was living at Aligarh and she knows Murari for the last about 5-6 years and we both have decided to marry each other and accordingly married in Arya Samaj Mandir on 20.3.2008. We have taken the decision without any pressure and I had gone with Murari with my own free will, he has not taken me forcibly. 8. The medical certificate regarding the age of girl has been sent by the Chief Medical Officer, Bulandshahar according to which, she is aged about 18 years. 9. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that since applicant No. 1 and girl, Rajani Bharti are major and they have married each other, the charge-sheet submitted against the applicants may be quashed. 10. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant contended that at the time of incident girl was minor therefore offence under Sections 363, 366 is fully made out. 11. After hearing learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A., learned counsel for the complainant and perusing the record and statement of girl recorded under Section 164, Cr.P.C. as well as medical certificate of girl, I am of the view that it is in the interest of justice that the proceedings of Case No. 304 of 2008 arising out of Case Crime No. 466 of 2008 under Sections 363, 366, 368, 504 and 506, IPC should be quashed as it amounts to harassment of the parties. 12. 12. In this view of the matter, proceedings of Case No. 304 of 2008 arising out of Case Crime No. 466 of 2008 under Sections 363, 366, 368, 504 and 506, IPC Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, district Aligarh are quashed. 13. With the above observations, this application is allowed. 14. Office is directed to return back the statement of Rajani Bharti recorded under Section 164, Cr.P.C. along with Medical Certificate of Rajani Bharti in sealed cover to the Court concerned. ————