Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/6561/2010 2/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 6561 of 2010
In
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 5430 of 2010
=========================================================
REVABHAI
KUBERBHAI PARMAR - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
PJ MEHTA for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MR KP RAWAL, APP for Respondent(s) : 1,
None
for Respondent(s) : 2 -
3.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 12/07/2010
ORAL
ORDER
This
application has been filed by the original complainant seeking
vacating of ex-parte ad interim relief granted by this Court on
2.6.2010 in Criminal Misc. Application No.5430/2010. On 2.6.2010,
learned Single Judge passed the following order :
The
nature of complaint and the allegations couple with the fact that the
accused and girl, who is major has been major as per the school
leaving certificate is said to have been happily married. Hence, Rule
returnable on 17.06.2010. Mr. Nanavati, learned APP waives service of
notice of Rule on behalf of respondent State. By way of ad-interim
relief, it is hereby directed that the Investigating Officer shall
not take any coercive steps whatsoever against present applicant till
the returnable date.
The
petitioner is father of the girl with whom original accused had
allegedly eloped giving rise to the complaint dated 9.10.2009, copy
of which is produced at Annexure-A to the main petition.
Counsel
for the petitioner candidly stated that girl was over 18 years of age
on the date of incident. He further submitted that the present
petitioner had filed habeas corpus petition before this Court being
Special Criminal Application No.141/2010. In the said petition,
Division Bench passed following order on 2.2.2010 :
Heard
learned advocate Mr. P J Mehta for the petitioner. Learned advocate
for the petitioner made available a copy of the Gujarat Registration
of Marriages Act, 2006 for perusal. He invited attention of the Court
to Clause 6 and other relevant provisions of the Act. He also
invited attention of the Court to the provisions contained in Section
3 (1) (xii) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe [Prevention of
Atrocities] Act, 1989.
Ld.
APP Mr. Vyas invited attention of the Court to the documents produced
along with the petition itself including that of an application filed
by the daughter of the petitioner dated 30/9/2009, as also affidavit
which is shown to have been affirmed on 25/9/2009 and further
affidavit of the girl which is also shown to have been affirmed on
25/9/2009 and a marriage registration certificate which is also dated
25/9/2009 and other relevant documents.
The
fact remains that the girl is missing since 13/9/2009 and the
application she has made to the police authorities is dated
30/9/2009. To ascertain as to whether the said application is made
by the daughter of the petitioner of her own will and wish or under
the influence of the respondents nos. 4 and 5 and whether she is with
respondents nos. 4 and 5 of her free will, in light of the
averments/allegations made in the petition, the matter is kept on
08/02/2010.
Thereafter
on 8.2.2010 in the habeas corpus petition, following order was passed
:
Heard
learned advocate Mr. P.J. Mehta for the petitioner and Mr. Devang
Vyas, learned Addl. P.P. for the respondent No.1 State of
Gujarat.
Learned
APP placed for perusal a statement recorded by an unarmed police head
constable, Dasada in presence of one Samimbanu Divan, a Member of
Bahujan Samaj Party, Gujarat Pradesh. Mr. Vyas also invited attention
of the court to the fact that the person who recorded the statement
on 30.11.2009 is the person who is instructing him in the Court.
Learned
advocate for the petitioner submitted that the direction issued by
this Court on 2.2.2010 is not complied with. Para 3 of the order
reads as under:
The
fact remains that the girl is missing since 13/9/2009 and the
application, she has made to the police authorities is dated
30/9/2009. To ascertain as to whether the said application is made by
the daughter of the petitioner of her own will and wish or under the
influence of the respondents nos.4 and 5 and whether she is with
respondents nos.4 and 5 of her free will, in light of the
averments/allegations made in the petition, the matter is kept on
08/02/2010 .
The
statement which is brought to the notice of this Court is dated
30.11.2009 which is definitely subsequent to the application dated
30.9.2009 and when that statement is made in presence of a social
worker, whose identity is also ascertained by the police authorities,
this Court has no reason to believe that the girl is detained by
respondent Nos.4 and 5 against her will.
Taking
into consideration the contents of that statement which was recorded
on 30.11.2009, this Court finds that there is no case made out for
issuance of a writ of habeas corpus.
At
the request of the learned advocate for the petitioner it is
clarified that non-entertainment of this petition will not render the
petitioner remediless. It will be open to the petitioner to take
recourse to any appropriate remedy available to him under the law.
The
petition is dismissed.
When
I find that the quashing petition has been already admitted and fixed
for hearing at an early date and learned Single Judge prima facie
observing that accused and daughter of the present petitioner are
happily married, I see no reason to vacate the interim relief. I
confirm the same to enure the same till final disposal of the
quashing petition. Additionally as noted above, habeas corpus
petition filed by the present petitioner has also failed. Learned
counsel for the petitioner made some general wild allegations against
the Division Bench passing said order. However, I need not go into
this application seeking vacating of interim relief since those
orders are not challenged before me nor recalled or reopened by
higher Court.
Application
is therefore, dismissed.
(Akil
Kureshi,J.)
(raghu)
Top