Punjab-Haryana High Court
Tabiab Hussain Ansari @ Vishal Master vs State Of Punjab on 10 August, 2011
Author: Rajesh Bindal
Bench: Rajesh Bindal
Criminal Misc.-M No. 11749 of 2011 [ 1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc.-M No. 11749 of 2011 (O&M)
Date of decision: 10.8.2011
Tabiab Hussain Ansari @ Vishal Master
.. Petitioner
v.
State of Punjab
.. Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL
Present: Mr. A. S. Cheema, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Abhishek Chautala, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab.
...
Rajesh Bindal J.
Prayer in the present petition is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, who is an accused in FIR No. 67 dated 14.3.2008, registered under Sections 363, 366-A, 376, 120-B IPC, Police Station, Haibowal, District Ludhiana.
It is a case of run away marriage where the allegations are that daughter of the complainant, aged 15-16 years, was kidnapped by the petitioner. The case set up by the petitioner is that both were in love and solemnised marriage against the wishes of the family of the girl. After the marriage, a son was born to them on 2.2.2009. The petitioner, though was living in Ludhiana, but he was not aware of the FIR registered against him. In terms of the provisions of Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, a Muslim girl of 15 years of age is competent to marry. The petitioner is in custody since 26.2.2011.
Criminal Misc.-M No. 11749 of 2011 [ 2] Learned counsel for the State submitted that the petitioner was not arrested immediately after the registration of FIR and he was declared proclaimed offender. Presently, the girl is also living with her parents, though the child born out of the wedlock is living with the sister of the petitioner. Considering the allegations against the petitioner in the FIR, he does not deserve the concession of bail.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties, in my opinion, the petitioner deserves the concession of bail. The fact that a child was born out of the wedlock shows that the parties were living happily after marriage. In terms of the judgment of this court in Kammu v. State of Haryana and others, 2010(4) RCR (Civil) 716, even if a muslim girl is 15 years of age, she is competent to marry. The petitioner is directed to be released on furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Ludhiana.
The petition stands disposed of.
(Rajesh Bindal) Judge 10.8.2011 mk