Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Rahul Pareek And Anr vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors on 9 September, 2016
Author: Mohammad Rafiq
Bench: Mohammad Rafiq
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO.2651/2014
1. Rahul Pareek S/o Shri Radheshyam Pareek, aged about
33 years, R/o Ward No.178, Sikar
2. Anita Saini W/o Rahul Pareek, aged about 21 years,
R/o Ward No.178, Sikar
Accused/Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan through P.P.
2. Superintendent of Police, Sikar.
Respondents
3. Jagdish Prasad S/o Shri Bholuram, by caste Saini, R/o
C.L.C. Ki Gali, Samarthpura, Sikar.
Complainant-Respondent
DATE OF ORDER : : 9th September, 2016
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
*******
Shri Amit Sharma for the petitioners.
Shri N.S. Dhakad, P.P. for the State.
Shri Mahaveer Singh, (C.I.), SHO, Udyog Nagar, Sikar present in person.
## This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by Rahul Pareek and Anita Saini inter alia with the prayer that the proceedings in the FIR no.128/14 lodged with Police Station Udhyog Nagar, Sikar by Jagdish Prasad Saini be quashed and set aside. This Court while issuing notice of the criminal petition and staying further proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR on 30.05.2014, took note of the order 2 passed in S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No.91/2014 earlier filed by the petitioner, which reads as under:
"Present petition has been filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India on behalf of the newly married couple praying that a direction be issued to the respondents to protect them as they apprehend danger to their life and liberty at the hands of those, who are opposed to the marriage.
Newly married couple is present in person before this Court.
Anita Saini, petitioner No.1, has been identified by her counsel Shri Prateek Sharma. She has stated that she is aged about twenty one years and she had married petitioner No.2; Rahul Pareek according to her own free will and accord. Anita Saini has further stated that she has done graduation and she is living happily with petitioner No.2 as a wife.
Without determining the validity of the marriage and age of the petitioner No.1, this Court is of the view that nobody can be permitted to take law into his own hands.
Consequently, accepting the prayer of counsel for the petitioners, a direction is issued to respondents to ensure necessary vigil and access threat perception to the life of the newly married couple and also ensure that no harm is caused to the life and liberty of the petitioners.
In view of the direction issued above, present petition is disposed of.
Consequent upon disposal of the main petition, the stay application also stands disposed of."
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the impugned FIR was registered by father of the petitioner no.2-Anita Saini only because he was opposed to her inter-caste marriage with petitioner no.1-Rahul Pareek. It is therefore that this Court in earlier criminal petition issued direction to the police authority to ensure necessary vigil and access threat perception to the life of the newly married couple and also ensure that no harm is caused to their life and liberty. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioners are happily leading married life and, in fact, an issue has been borne out of their wedlock. The purpose of the 3 impugned FIR was only to harass the petitioners, especially petitioner no.1-Rahul Pareek because he married the daughter of the complainant against his wishes. The impugned order be therefore quashed and set aside. Learned counsel for the petitioners in support of his arguments cited the judgement of Supreme Court in Lata Singh vs. State of U.P. & Anr.-(2006) 5 SCC 475. Learned Public Prosecutor who is assisted by Investigating Officer Mahaveer Singh, SHO, Police Station Udyog Nagar, Sikar submits that the investigation so far carried out by the Investigating Officer did not reveal any offence committed by the petitioners and that to the best of knowledge of the Investigating Officer, the petitioners are leading happy married life.
In view of above, the further investigation in the impugned FIR cannot be allowed to proceed. Consequently, the FIR No.128/14 lodged with Police Station Udhyog Nagar, Sikar is quashed and aside.
The petition is accordingly allowed.
(Mohammad Rafiq),J.
RS/8