Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1522 (RAJ)

Prakash Kumawat v. State of Rajasthan

2018-07-19

VIJAY BISHNOI

body2018
JUDGMENT Vijay Bishnoi, J. This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the petitioner-Prakash Kumawat being aggrieved with the order dated 27.06.2018 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Amet, District Rajsamand (hereinafter to be referred as 'the court below ) in FIR No.151/2018 of Police Station Amet, District Rajsamand, whereby the court below has rejected the application filed by petitioner-Prakash Kumawat for handing over the custody of respondent No.5-Kavita Kumawat to him. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent No.4-Bhagwan Lal lodged the FIR No.151/2018 at Police Station Amet, District Rajsamand on 26.05.2018 with the allegation that his daughter respondent No.5-Kavita Kumawat was abducted by petitionerPrakash Kumawat, his father Ganesh, mother Kanchan and sister Sangeeta and two other persons on 27.04.2018 from his house with the intention to marry her to the petitioner. 3. After registration of the above referred FIR, the police have recovered respondent No.5-Kavita Kumawat, daughter of respondent No.4-Bhagwan Lal, on 20.06.2018 from Gomati Circle and her statements were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. wherein she has specifically stated that she has not been abducted by the petitioner or the other persons, named as accused in the above referred FIR. On the contray she has specifically stated that she has married to petitioner and she went with him as per her own will on 27.04.2018. The respondent No.5-Kavita Kumawat has refused to go with her parents, therefore, as per the order of the Child Welfare Committee, Rajsamand, the police have sent her to Nari Niketan, Rajsamand while claiming that she is minor. 4. At this stage, the petitioner has preferred an application before the court below with a prayer for handing over the custody of respondent No.5-Kavita Kumawat to him while claiming that she is major and she is his legally wedded wife. 5. As noted earlier, the said application was dismissed by the court below vide impugned order. Hence, this criminal misc. petition. 6. Pursuant to the direction given by this Court on 13.07.2018, the ASI, Police Station Amet, District Rajsamand along with lady constable has produced the respondent No.5 before this Court today. 7. The respondent No.5-Kavita Kumawat, present in person, has specifically stated that her marriage was solemnized with the petitioner in the year 2010, however, now her parents are not willing to send her to her in-laws house. 7. The respondent No.5-Kavita Kumawat, present in person, has specifically stated that her marriage was solemnized with the petitioner in the year 2010, however, now her parents are not willing to send her to her in-laws house. The respondent No.5 has also specifically stated that her age is 19 years and she is major. She has also stated that her parents got recorded her wrong date of birth in the school record. The respondent No.5 has categorically stated that she wants to go with her husband i.e. petitioner-Prakash Kumawat and does not want to go with her parents 8. As per case diary, the police have also concluded that the allegations levelled in the FIR No.151/2018 of Police Station Amet, District Rajsamand by respondent No.4-Bhagwan Lal, are false as the respondent No.5-Kavita Kumawat is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner-Prakash Kumawat and she went with him on 20.04.2018 as per her own will. 9. In the factual report, it is mentioned that the police have proposed to file negative final report in the matter before the court concerned, shortly. 10. Learned counsel for the respondent No.4 has argued that as the respondent No.5-Kavita Kumawat is minor, her custody cannot be handed over to the petitioner. It is also stated that the marriage solemnized between the petitioner and the respondent No.5 was void ab initio as at that time the petitioner as well as the respondent No.5 have not attained the age of marriage. Leaned counsel for the respondent No.4 has submitted that if the respondent No.5 is not willing to go with her parents then the only way left is to send her to Nari Niketan. 11. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the police have already proposed to file negative final report in the FIR No.151/2018 of Police Station Amet, District Rajsamand while concluding that the respondent No.5-Kavita Kumawat is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner-Prakash Kumawat and looking to the said circumstances, appropriate order be passed by this Court. 12. Having taken into consideration the above noted facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned order dated 27.06.2018 passed by the court below in FIR No.151/2018 of Police Station Amet, District Rajsamand is liable to be set aside. 13. Hence, the order dated 27.06.2018 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Amet, District Rajsamand is set aside. 13. Hence, the order dated 27.06.2018 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Amet, District Rajsamand is set aside. The application preferred by the petitioner before the Judicial Magistrate, Amet, District Rajsamand for handing over the custody of respondent No.5-Kavita Kumawat to him is disposed of and it is ordered that as per the desire of the respondent No.5-Kavita Kumawat, she may be allowed to go with the petitioner-Prakash Kumawat. 14. The ASI, Police Station Amet, District Rajsamand is directed to ensure the safe return of respondent No.5-Kavita Kumawat to her in-laws house along with petitioner-Prakash Kumawat. 15. With these observations, this criminal misc. petition is disposed of. 16. Stay petition is disposed of.