Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(iii). After holding due investigation, the name of Ravi Gupta was exonerated by the police and the name of two more persons were inserted as accused, namely, Bachcha Yadav @ Jagdish and Pawan Kumar Yadav. A charge sheet was submitted by the police on 02.01.2014 against the aforesaid persons u/s 363, 366 I.P.C.

(iv). In paragraph 10 of the petition, in no uncertain terms it is stated that the applicant Pradeep Yadav and the prosecutrix Ms. 'K' have solemnized marriage on 19.8.2014 at Arya Samaj Temple Aliganj, Lucknow and later on at Belha Devi Temple, Pratapgarh on 11.4.2016. Not only this, they have got their marriage registered on 26.5.2023, a copy of Marriage Certificate is annexed as Annexure-5 to the petition.

(i) The extra-ordinary power of this Court u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is being invoked by the applicant for quashing of the entire proceeding of Case No.4775 of 2021 (State vs. Nem Kumar) pending before the learned First Additional Civil Judge (S.D.), Sitapur, u/s 363, 366 IPC, including the impugned summoning order dated 8.2.2021 and the Charge Sheet No.1 dated 03.10.2020 arising out of Case Crime No.257 of 2020, u/s 363, 366 IPC, Police Station-Rampur Mathura, District Sitapur.

(ii). Facts of the present case in brief is that on 01.8.2020 the opposite party no.2 has lodged an F.I.R. against the petitioner to the effect that during the night on 29.7.2020 around 10.00 in the night, applicant Nem Chandra Mishra has enticed away daughter of opposite party no.2. After lodging of the FIR, as a natural outcome the investigation of the case started rolling and the police have recorded statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C. On 15.9.2020 the prosecutrix opposite party no.3 reached to the police station and disclosed that she married with petitioner Nem Chand Mishra on her own free will and choice, disclosing her age about 18 years. Thereafter, the prosecutrix was produced before the Magistrate for recording her statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. on 31.7.2020, in which she stated that there was no threat or coercion upon her to enter into this nuptial tie with the applicant. Not only this, she has also declined and refused to get her medically examined. The high-handedness and atrocities of the police started when they dumped the girl to Bal Kalyan Samiti, Sitapur before sending her to Nari Ashray Grih, Lucknow without taking her consent. Left with no option, they have approached this Court by filing a Habeas Corpus No.17589 of 2020 and the Court has come to rescue of petitioners and released the detenu/prosecutrix in favour of the husband-petitioner by order dated 8.12.2020.

(iii). This matter has got a new angle when on 12.10.2021 the prosecutrix-opposite party no.3 has given birth to a baby boy- Shantanu. As per High School Certificate the date of birth of the prosecutrix is 01.01.2003 and at the time of incident she was about to reach the age of majority. Thereafter the husband and wife with their new born baby were peacefully and happily residing. On the other hand, the police personnel without anticipating the amount of damage to the couple, have submitted a charge sheet u/s 363, 366 IPC and the learned Magistrate without applying judicial mind have taken cognizance of those offence on a proforma order dated 8.2.2021, hence this petition.

LEGAL DISCUSSION :

[10]. Since in all the aforesaid petitions, the report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C./charge sheet was filed by the police u/s 363, 366 I.P.C., the provisions of Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. are relevant to reproduce here, which reads thus :
"363. Punishment for kidnapping.--
Whoever kidnaps any person from India or from lawful guardianship, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
366. Kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel her marriage, etc.--