Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1840 (RAJ)

Sonu v. State of Rajasthan

2018-09-05

PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

body2018
JUDGMENT Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. - Petitioners have preferred this misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 for quashing of the FIR No.93/2017 registered at P.S. Odyogik Kshetra, District Pali for the offence under Sections 380, 363, 366 of the IPC and Section 16 & 17 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and for protection of life and liberty of the petitioners. 2. An FIR bearing No.93/2017 was lodged by Smt. Vimla, the mother of the petitioner No.1 which was registered at Police Station Odyogik Kshetra, District Pali with an allegation that the accused petitioner No.2 abducted and confined her daughter. 3. The petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.2 as identified by the counsel for the petitioner are present in person in the Court. 4. The Investigating Officer is also present in person in compliance of the order dated 16.11.2017. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor and Investigating Officer stated that though the girl is major but at the time of lodging of the FIR on 08.04.2017, the girl was a minor, and therefore, he was not in a position to close the investigation. Further a statement has been made that as per the school record, the date of birth of the petitioner No.1 is 23.08.1999. 6. On being inquired, the petitioner No.1 and petitioner 2 jointly stated that they are living together as husband and wife for last one year. The petitioner No.1 stated that she is willingly staying with her husband / petitioner No.2 and is not under any kind of duress or force. Petitioner No.1 further stated that she is voluntarily and happily residing with her husband. 7. This Court had passed the following interim order on 12.09.2017 :- "Counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention to the Court order passed by this Court on 24.08.2017 in S.B Criminal Misc. Petition No.1228/2017. Issue notice to the respondents. Rule is made returnable within a period of four weeks. Meanwhile, all further proceedings in FIR No.93/2017 registered at P.S. Odyogik Kshetra, District Pali shall remain stayed." 8. This Court on 16.11.2017 had passed the following order :- "1. Petitioners have preferred this misc. Petition No.1228/2017. Issue notice to the respondents. Rule is made returnable within a period of four weeks. Meanwhile, all further proceedings in FIR No.93/2017 registered at P.S. Odyogik Kshetra, District Pali shall remain stayed." 8. This Court on 16.11.2017 had passed the following order :- "1. Petitioners have preferred this misc. petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C., 1973 for quashing of the FIR No.93/2017 registered at Police Station Odyogik Kshetra, District Pali for the offence under Sections 380, 363, 366 of IPC and Sections 16 & 17 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and for protection of life and liberty of the petitioners. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has shown the earlier order passed by this Court, which reads as follows :- "1. Petitioners have preferred this misc. petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C., 1973 for quashing of the FIR No.93/2017 registered at P.S. Odyogik Kshetra, District Pali for the offence falling under Sections 380, 363, 366 of the IPC and Section 16 & 17 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and for protection of life and liberty of the petitioners. 2. The girl has attained the age of 18 years today. On the order of this Court dated 03.08.2017, the girl has been produced before this Court today. The girl has been asked about her will and she has stated before the Court that she, who is the petitioner No.1, wants to go with the boy, who is the petitioner No.2 as both are major. 3. Thus, the misc. petition is disposed of with the direction to the concerned Nari Niketan that the girl may be released to the petitioner No.2 as she has become major and she is willing to live with the petitioner No.2 The respondent No.2 Superintendent of Police Pali, is directed that he shall ensure the safety and security of the girl and the boy as per the assessment of threat made by him. 4. Both the petitioners shall not be arrested in the FIR No.93/2017 registered at Police Station Odyogik Kshetra, District Pali. The investigation shall be completed by the investigating authority after taking the statement of the girl and the boy on record strictly in accordance with law. In case, the petitioners need to be arrested then a notice of 15 days shall be given to them before making any such arrest. The petitioners shall be at liberty to approach this Court, if required. In case, the petitioners need to be arrested then a notice of 15 days shall be given to them before making any such arrest. The petitioners shall be at liberty to approach this Court, if required. 5. It is needless to say that Nari Niketan along with the help of Superintendent of Police shall ensure full safety of girl." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that inspite of the petitioner being major at this juncture the Investigating officer has refused to close the FIR. Both the petitioners are present in person. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor states that it is admitted position that on this date, the petitioner No.1 is major, however, when the earlier allegations were made, the age was doubtful. Learned Public Prosecutor does not dispute the fact that the girl being major today but states that on the date of initial FIR, the petitioner No.1 was minor. 5. On being asked by this Court, the parties stated that they are willingly living with each other as husband and wife. The earlier misc. petition clearly indicates that serious prejudice is being caused to the present petitioner by harassing them, by not closing the case even in the given circumstances that they are both major on this date and are willing to live with each other. 6. Meanwhile, all further proceedings in FIR No.93/2017 registered at Police Station Odyogik Kshetra, District Pali shall remain stayed. The investigating officer shall remain present before this Court on the next date of hearing so as to explain as to what circumstance, the proceedings are not being closed against the present petitioner in light of the aforesaid facts recorded by Court." 9. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record of the case as well as after interacting with the petitioners No.1 and 2, this Court finds that petitioner No.1 has become major. The previous order dictated by this Court on 16.11.2017 was passed only after noting that petitioner No.1 had already become major. The petitioner No.1 had become major on 23.08.2017 and since then she has been residing with petitioner No.2 as his legally wedded wife. The presence of the petitioners No.1 and 2 in the Court and their response to the queries of the Court further indicate that the petitioners are residing together as husband and wife. The petitioner No.1 had become major on 23.08.2017 and since then she has been residing with petitioner No.2 as his legally wedded wife. The presence of the petitioners No.1 and 2 in the Court and their response to the queries of the Court further indicate that the petitioners are residing together as husband and wife. The petitioner No.1 was major when the last order was dictated by this Court on 16.1.2017 and thus, on the face of it, the FIR against the present petitioners cannot be allowed to continue. It is strange that the Public Prosecutor submits that even while noting all these facts, the investigating officer is unable to put a closure report to the FIR. However, in the interest of justice and in light of the aforenoted facts, this Court allows the present misc. petition and quashes the FIR No.93/2017 registered at Police Station Odyogik Kshetra, District Pali.