Gujarat High Court
Niravbhai Bhupendrabhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat & on 11 December, 2014
Author: J.B.Pardiwala
Bench: J.B.Pardiwala
R/SCR.A/4699/2014 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 4699 of 2014
================================================================
NIRAVBHAI BHUPENDRABHAI PATEL....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MS. KRUTI M SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR VA MANSURI, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR AN SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
Date : 11/12/2014
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Shah, the learned APP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.1 State of Gujarat. Mr. Hakim, the learned advocate has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent No.2 original first informant and waives service of notice of rule.
2. By this application, the petitioner original accused seeks to invoke the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying for quashing of the F.I.R. being C.R. No.I118 of 2014 filed before the Chhotaudepur Police Station, District:
Vadodara (Rural) for the offence punishable under Sections366 r/w.114 of the I.P.C.
3. It appears that the sister of the respondent no.2original first informant viz. Azima @ Anvi, aged 21 years fell in love with the Page 1 of 3 R/SCR.A/4699/2014 ORDER petitioner herein. On 16.10.2014, she left her parental home. Her statement dated 10.12.2014 recorded by the Police is quite eloquent. In the statement, she has made it very clear that she was in love with the petitioner and both ultimately decided to get married. It is further stated that they went to Mumbai and got married at the temple of Lord Dattatrey situated at Navapura. She had also made it clear that there was no enticement or luring at the hand of the petitioner. According to her, she accompanied with the petitioner on her free will and volition.
4. Mr. Hakim, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent no.2 has opposed this application. He submits that assuming for the moment that no case under Section 366 of the IPC is constituted, yet the authorities should be permitted to initiate the proceedings under the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the materials on record, the only question falls for my consideration is whether the FIR deserves to be quashed. I have already discussed the statement of Azima @ Anvi, she had made her stance very clear that she is a major. Having regard to her stance, no case under Section366 of the IPC is made out. Azima @ Anvi has already got married with the petitioner, I am not going into the question regarding the legality and validity of the marriage is concerned. I am only concerned with the question whether the police should be permitted to continue with the investigation. In my view, since none of the ingredients to constitute the kidnapping and to allow the investigation by the police will be nothing but an abuse of process of law.
6. In the result, this application is allowed. The F.I.R. being C.R. No.I118 of 2014 filed before the Chhotaudepur Police Station, Page 2 of 3 R/SCR.A/4699/2014 ORDER District: Vadodara (Rural) is hereby ordered to be quashed. Consequently, all further proceedings pursuant to the FIR shall stand terminated.
It is clarified that nothing stated in this order is meant to affect the proceedings under the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003, if initiated in future. I also clarify once again that I have not gone into the legality of the marriage between the petitioner and Azima @ Anvi.
I clarify that it shall be open for the respondent no.2 to initiate appropriate proceeding under the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act, 2003 before the competent authority viz. Collector, if permissible in law.
Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.) aruna Page 3 of 3