Anjum Parveen @ Shubhangi Sheikh ... vs State Of Maharashtra Through ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 1359 Bom

                                                                                                                 apl.910.15
                                                                 1




                                                                                                                   
                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      BENCH AT NAGPUR, NAGPUR.




                                                                                     
                                                                ...

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 910/2015

1) Anjum Parveen @ Shubhangi Sheikh Sameer Aged about 20 years Resident Mahagaon (Kasba) P.S. Lalkhed

Tah.Darwa, Dist.Yavatmal.

2)

Sheikh Sameer @ Shahrukh Sheikh Israil Aged about 21 years Resident Mahagaon (Kasba)

PS Lalkhed, Dist.Yavatmal. .. ...APPLICANTS

v e r s u s

1) State of Maharashtra

Through Police Station, Lalkhed Yavatmal.

    2)      Ananta Chaituji  Raut
            Aged  about 50 years,  
            Resident Mahagaon (Kasba) 





            Tah.Darwa,  Dist.Yavatmal.                            ..                             ...RESPONDENT

...........................................................................................................................

Mr. Mir Nagman Ali, Advocate for the applicants Mr. J.Y.Ghurde, Addl. Public Prosecutor for respondent no.1 -State Respondent No.2 served.

............................................................................................................................

                                                         CORAM:    B.R. GAVAI &
                                                                        Mrs. SWAPNA  JOSHI,JJ . 
                                                         DATED :        7th  April, 2016

ORAL JUDGMENT: (PER B.R.GAVAI, J.)

apl.910.15

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by

consent.

2. By way of present Application, the applicants are

praying for quashing and setting aside the First Information Report

(FIR)bearing No. 59/2015, for the offences punishable under

Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

The FIR was lodged by respondent no.2, who is the

father of applicant no.1. The allegations in the FIR are that the

applicant no.2 has kidnapped the applicant no.1.

4. This Application has been filed by the applicants

contending therein that they are married to each other. The date of

birth of the petitioner no.1 is 4th November, 1997. The alleged

kidnapping has taken place on 16th May, 2015. Thus, it would be

seen that on the date of the alleged incident, the age of the

applicant no.1 was seventeen years six months and eleven days.

As such, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in

the case of S.Varadrajan vs. State of madras reported in 1964

STPL (LE) 2967 SC, the applicant no.1 had reached the age of

understanding as to what was right and wrong for her. The

apl.910.15

applicant nos. 1 and 2 are also blessed with a child.

5. Inspite of being duly served with notice of final

disposal, the respondent no.2 has chosen to remain absent.

6. Both the applicants along with their children, who are

personally present in the Court, reiterate the factum regarding

their marriage. Undisputedly, as on today, the applicant no.1 has

also crossed the age of 18-years.

7. In that view of the matter, we find that the pendency of

criminal proceedings would unnecessary cause disturbance in the

family life of the applicant. This is a fit case wherein this Court

should exercise its powers under section 482 of the Cr.P.C., to give

an end to criminal proceedings. Rule is, therefore, made absolute

in terms of prayer clause (1) of the Application.

                    JUDGE                            JUDGE





    sahare