Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

5. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, while considering the aforesaid case, at the time of consideration on charge, made the following observations:

"6. The record shows that despite having been provided with the copy of Nikahnama, no effort was made by the police to verify the same. Further, the copy of this document was not even filed with the charge sheet by the IO. It was upon the direction of the Court after production of the original Nikahnama by Ld. Counsel for the accused during arguments on point of charge that the IO filed verification report on 21.07.2018. This report of IO suggests that the person who had solemnized the marriage, namely, Sh. Abdul Kalam said that he was neither priest / Qazi nor did he have any stamp nor did he conduct any process related to Nikah. The statement in writing of Shri Abdul Kalam annexed with the verification report, however, suggests the contrary. As per this statement dated 04.07.2018 of Shri Abdul Kalam, he had got the prosecutrix and accused married on 23.11.2012. He also verified Nikahnama. He stated that the register in which the entries were made got destroyed because of termites. He also stated that the said Nikahnama was signed by one Advocate Sh. Abdul Sattar and two witnesses namely Sh. Islamuddin and Intezar Ahmed apart from Ihe Qazi Sh. Abdul Kalam himself and bride and the bridegroom. He also stated that no ID proof was taken at the time of solemnizing marriage.