Saudagar Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab on 20 July, 2009

CRM-M-6692 of 2009                                  -1 -




     IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH

                               ****

CRM-M-6692 of 2009
DATE OF DECISION: 20.7.2009

****

Saudagar Singh and another

. . . . Petitioners

VS.

State of Punjab

. . . . Respondent

****

CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN

****

Present: Mr.Sanjay Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms.Rajni Gupta, Addl. A.G. Punjab
for the State/respondent.

Mr.Chaman Lal, Advocate for the complainant.

****

RAKESH KUMAR JAIN J.(ORAL)

Learned counsel for the petitioners was directed to

disclose the date on which the husband of the complainant and her

son Gurjot Singh travelled from India to America.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both of

them left India for America on 8.2.2009. However, learned counsel

for the petitioners argues that the petitioners are the Jeth and

Nanad of the complainant. The offence, if any, was committed by

the husband, namely, Bhupinder Singh. He further submits that if

a child is kidnapped is minor and below the age of 16 years if he is

male or below the age of 18 years if she is female and is kidnapped
CRM-M-6692 of 2009 -2 –

from lawful guardianship, no offence of kidnapping is made out in

view of second exception of Section 361of IPC, if the child is in the

custody of a person who is in good faith believes himself to be

entitled to lawful custody of such child, unless such act is

committed for an immoral or unlawful purpose. He also cites a

decision of the Supreme Court in the case of “Chandrakala Menon

Vs. Capt. Vipin Menon” 1993(2) RCR (Criminal) 5.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

pursuant to the order dated 10.3.2009, petitioners have joined the

investigation.

Learned counsel for the State/respondent, on

instructions received from HC Mahadev Singh, admits the fact as

stated by the counsel for the petitioners.

In view of the above, order dated 10.3.2009 is hereby

made absolute.

It is directed that the petitioners shall join the

investigation as and when required and shall abide by the

conditions as envisaged by Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Petition is disposed of.

                                                    (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN)
JULY 20, 2009                                           JUDGE
vivek