Criminal Misc. No.M-3135 of 2009 -1-
***
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No.M-3135 of 2009
Date of decision : 3.11.2009
Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi and others .....Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another ...Respondents
****
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND
Present: Mr.R.K.Girdhar, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.B.B.S.Teji, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab.
S. D. ANAND, J.
Learned counsel for the petitioners states that this petition
may be dismissed as infructuous qua petitioner no.1 as she was murdered
during the pendency of this petition.
Heard.
It is apparent from the record that petitioners No.1 and 2 i.e.
Grupreet Singh @ Gopi and Manpreet Kaur were a run away couple who
married against the wishes of their parents. Respondent no.2 Labh Singh
got lodged FIR No.200 dated 19.11.2008 under Sections 363-A, 366-A,
120, 120-B IPC at Police Station, Faridkot against the petitioners. As
already noticed, petitioners No.1 and 2 Grupreet Singh @ Gopi and
Manpreet Kaur were a run away couple out of whom Gurpreet Singh is
averred to have been killed as a measure of honour killing. Learned
counsel for the petitioners states that an FIR in the context had already
Criminal Misc. No.M-3135 of 2009 -2-
***
been lodged. Petitioners No.3 and 4 Guranditta Singh @ Hilli and
Jaswinder Kaur are parents of Gurpreet Singh; while petitioner no.5
Charajit Kaur @ Jaswinder Kaur is married sister-in-law of petitioner
Manpreet Kaur. The essential premise of the FIR lodged by respondent
lno.2 was that his daughter i.e. petitioner no.2 Manpreet Kaur was a minor
on the date was eloped or was enticed by deceased Gurpreet Singh.
In the course of the petition, the petitioners applied for the
quashment of the impugned FIR by averring that the date of birth of
Manpreet kaur was 19.11.2008 and was, thus, a major. The plea raised
thereby is that it falsifies the very foundational premise of the allegation
that petitioner no.2 was kidnapped while she was a minor. In the course of
the reply, the date of birth of petitioner no.2 is indicated as 29.12.1990. In
that view of things, the averment in the reply proceeds, petitioner no.2
Manpreet Kaur was a minor on the date of elopement/enticement.
As against it, the petitioners placed reliance upon the marks
statement issued by the C.B.S.E. in respect of All India Secondary
School Examination, 2007 taken by Manpreet Kaur under Roll
No.2155030. In the course thereof, her date of birth is recorded as
1.11.1990. The worst inference that can be drawn, in the circumstances of
the case, that petitioner Manpreet Kaur was aged 17 years 11 months and
few days on the date of elopement. In a such like eventuality, a Single
Bench of this Court in Ridhwana and another Vs. U.T.Administration
and others 2008 (4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 242 held that no offence under
Section 363, 366 and 376 IPC is made out if a girl aged 16 years 4
months marries of her freewill against the wishes of parents after leaving
the house of parents of her own. A similar view was taken by the Delhi
High Court in Rukshana and another Vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and
Criminal Misc. No.M-3135 of 2009 -3-
***
others 2007 (3) R.C.R.(Criminal) 542.
In view, thus, of the above noticed circumstances of the case
and in view of the fact that petitioner no.1 had already been murdered
during the pendency of the petition before this Court and also the law
laiddown by this Court in Ridhwana’s case and by Delhi High Court in
Rukshana’s case (supra) it is obvious that allowing the impugned
prosecution to continue shall amount to an abuse of the process of
Court, particularly when there is nothing on record to indicate how exactly
petitioners ( other than the murdered petitioner and petitioner Manpreet
Kaur) could have facilitated the elopement/enticement of petitioner
Manpreet Kaur (by murdered petitioner). The petition shall stand
allowed. FIR No.200 dated 19.11.2008 under Sections 363-A, 366-A, 120,
120-B IPC registered at Police Station, Faridkot shall stand quashed.
Disposed of accordingly.
November 03, 2008 (S. D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE
Note: Whether to be referred to Reporter: Yes/No
Criminal Misc. No.M-3135 of 2009 -4-
***