Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Girdhari Lal Meena vs State Of Rajasthan on 22 November, 2019
Author: Sandeep Mehta
Bench: Sandeep Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 1080/2019
Girdhari Lal Meena S/o Kalu Ram Meena, Aged About 26 Years,
B/c Meena, R/o Raithal, Tehsil Ahore, District Jalore. (Rajasthan)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Home Secretary Secretariat,
Jaipur.
2. The Superintendent Of Police, Jalore
3. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Jalore.
4. The Station House Officer, Nosara, District-Jalore
5. Aabid Khan S/o Sharif Khan, B/c Mev Musalman, R/o
Sadhuka Ki Dhani, Police Station- Kishangarh, Bas,
District Alwar, (Rajasthan)
6. Niyaz Bhai S/o Not Known, B/c Musalman, R/o Village Not
Know, District Alwar, At Present Residing At Village -
Raithal, Tehsil Ahore, Police Station-Nosara, District
Jalore. (Rajasthan)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Panney Singh
Mr. R.S. Rathore
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Farzand Ali GA-cum-AAG
Mr. Vikram Sharma, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Judgment 22/11/2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the material available on record.
The instant misc. petition has been preferred by the petitioner Girdhari Lal Meena under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking a direction that the police officer concerned should be directed to get recorded the statement of the petitioner's wife Smt. Antar (Downloaded on 25/11/2019 at 08:54:30 PM) (2 of 3) [CRLMP-1080/2019] Devi under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in the presence of the Magistrate in connection with the proceedings of the Missing Person Report No.29/2018 registered at the Police Station Nosara, District Jalore and that a direction be given to present her in this Court.
The petitioner claims that his wife Smt. Antar Devi went missing from the matrimonial home on 21.12.2018 carrying some gold and silver ornaments/articles with her. The petitioner had gone to work in the fields and Smt. Antar Devi disappeared during this period. As per the petitioner, the investigating officer, traced out Smt. Antar Devi but, without getting her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she was handed over to some unknown person. The contention of Shri Panney Singh and Shri Rajendra Singh, Advocates representing the petitioner, is that the entire action of the investigating officer is surrounded in a grave cloud of suspicion and in order to secure the ends of justice, this Court should direct that the statement of Smt. Antar Devi be got recorded by a Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
Per contra, Shri Farzand Ali, learned AAG assisted by Shri Vikram Sharma, learned Public Prosecutor, vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the petitioner's counsel. They urged that statement of a witness can be recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. only in the event some cognizable offence is committed and an FIR is registered for the same. He submitted that neither was any crime committed because Antar Devi admittedly went away from the matrimonial home voluntarily nor was any FIR registered in relation to her dis-appearance. They further pointed out that Smt. Antar Devi was discovered by the I.O. during inquiry of the Missing Person Report and when an inquiry was made from her, she gave a statement that she had (Downloaded on 25/11/2019 at 08:54:30 PM) (3 of 3) [CRLMP-1080/2019] voluntarily left the matrimonial home and was living with her lover Shri Aabid Khan. Antar Devi admittedly is a major woman.
Considered in light of the facts and circumstances available on record, this Court is of the opinion that neither was Smt. Antar Devi under any kind of illegal confinement nor was any cognizable offence committed when she went away from the petitioner's house. Only a missing person report was lodged by the petitioner and hence, there was no occasion warranting recording of the statement of Smt. Antar Devi under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The prayer made by the petitioner in this case is more in the nature of seeking a direction of restitution of his conjugal rights which cannot be acceded to while exercising inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
As a consequence, the misc. petition fails and is hereby rejected.
(SANDEEP MEHTA),J 156-Tikam/-
(Downloaded on 25/11/2019 at 08:54:30 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)