Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCR.A/1901/2011 4/ 4 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 1901 of 2011
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
=========================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To
be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=========================================
MUKESH
RAVAJIBHAI GOTI - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance :
VIRAL
K SHAH for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR LB DABHI, APP for Respondent(s) :
1,
PARTY-IN-PERSON for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 23/08/2011
ORAL
JUDGMENT
1. The
present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read
with with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been
preferred by the petitioner-original accused, who is now the husband
of the daughter of the original complainant, to quash and set aside
the impugned Complaint/FIR, being CR No. I 93/2011 registered with
Kapodara Police Station, Surat for the offences punishable under
Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Respondent
no. 2-original complainant-mother of Madhu @ Madhuri has lodged the
FIR with Kapodara Police Station, Surat against the petitioner for
the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian
Penal Code alleging interalia that
the petitioner has kidnapped and/or abducted her daughter Madhu @
Madhuri aged 17 years 4 months and 15 days and thereby has committed
the offence under Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code.
Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the same, the petitioner, who
is now the husband of the daughter of the original complainant, has
preferred the present Special Criminal Application under Article 226
of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure to quash and set aside the impugned FIR.
3. Shri
Viral Shah, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner
has vehemently submitted that as such the petitioner has not
committed any offence as alleged under Sections 363 and 366 of the
Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that as such the petitioner and
the daughter of the original complainant-Madhu @ Madhuri were
serving together in a diamond factory and they were in love with each
other and, therefore, she has gone voluntarily with the petitioner
and both of them married on 20/04/2011 and their marriage has also
been registered with the office of the Sub Registrar, Marriage
Registration Office, Surat
Municipal Corporation, Surat on 25/04/2011. It is submitted that
both the petitioner and the daughter of the original complainant are
staying happily and, therefore, it is requested to quash and set
aside the impugned FIR.
4. In
response to the notice issued by this Court, respondent no.
2-original complainant-mother of Madhu @ Madhuri is personally
present in the Court and she has requested to pass an appropriate
order considering the statement of her daughter recorded by the
Investigating Officer leaving the fate of her daughter on destiny and
her statement is that she has voluntarily gone with the petitioner
and they got married.
5. Shri
L.B. Dabhi, learned APP has requested to pass an appropriate order
considering the statement of the girl Madhu @ Madhuri. He has
produced on record the statement of the girl Madhu @ Madhuri recorded
by the Investigating Officer dated 02/06/2011, which is directed to
be taken on record.
6. Heard
Shri Viral Shah, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the
petitioner, Shri L.B. Dabhi, learned APP appearing on behalf of the
respondent-State and respondent no. 2-original
complainant-party-in-person and considered the statement of the girl
Madhu @ Madhuri, daughter of respondent no. 2-original complainant,
who is reported to be now the wife of the petitioner. The daughter
of respondent no. 2- original complainant-Madhu @ Madhuri has
categorically stated that she has voluntarily gone with petitioner
and they have married on 20/04/2011 and their marriage is registered
with the office of the Sub Registrar, Marriage Registration Office,
Surat Municipal Corporation,
Surat on 25/04/2011. She has also categorically stated before the
Court that she wants to go with the petitioner, who is her husband.
Considering the above, it cannot be said that the petitioner has
committed any offence, as alleged, under Sections 363 and 366 of the
Indian Penal Code and, therefore, to continue the criminal
proceedings against the petitioner would be abuse of process of Court
and law and, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that this is a
fit case to exercise powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure and to quash and set aside the impugned FIR.
7. In
view of the above and for the reasons stated hereinabove, the present
petition is allowed and the impugned FIR, being CR No. I 93/2011
registered with Kapodara Police Station, Surat against the petitioner
for the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian
Penal Code is hereby quashed and set aside so far as the petitioner
is concerned. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
(M.R.
SHAH, J.)
siji
Top