Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCR.A/2046/2009 2/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 2046 of
2009
=========================================================
KAMLESHKUMAR
DAJIBHAI PATEL & 1 - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
JAPAN V DAVE for
Applicant(s) : 1 - 2.
MR KARTIK PANDYA, ASST. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
for Respondent(s) : 1,
RULE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 2,
MR
SATYAM Y CHHAYA for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 08/09/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. The
petitioners have challenged the warrant issued by the learned
Magistrate, under Section-97 of the Criminal Procedure Code, dated
18.08.2009. Respondent No.2, herein, is the original applicant before
the learned Magistrate, who is the father of petitioner No.2, herein.
It appears that there was an affair between the petitioner No.1 and
the daughter of respondent No.2 and she had left her father’s house
and joined petitioner No.1, voluntarily.
Admittedly, they have got married. They are both of marriageable age
and are stated to be aged about 22 years.
2. The
learned Counsel for respondent No.2, however, stated that the order
passed by the learned Magistrate is perfectly legal.
3. When
the daughter of the original applicant, herself, has come forward
stating that she is not kept in the custody of petitioner No.1 or any
of his relatives, against her wish, there is no question of illegal
detention or illegal custody of the daughter of the original
applicant. Issuance of warrant, thus, must fail, on this limited
ground.
4. The
learned counsel for the petitioners, however, voiced his apprehension
that the petitioners face hostilities from respondent No.2, herein,
and also face real threat to their safety. The OFFICER
in-charge of the CONCERNED police station, shall ensure
that no harm is caused to the petitioners, on account of petitioner
No.2 having married against the wish of the original applicant,
respondent No.2, herein. For this purpose, if the petitioners file
an APPLICATION before the concerned police authorities,
the same shall be considered and the steps may be taken, as found
necessary.
5. With
the above observations, the impugned warrant dated 18.08.2009, is
QUASHED. Rule is made absolute, in the above terms.
(AKIL
KURESHI, J.)
Umesh/
Top