SHYAMA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for O.P. Nos. 2 and 3 as also learned counsel for the State.

(2.) THE petitioners are the mother -in -law and the husband of O.P. No. 2.

(3.) THE interesting aspect of the matter would be that after the institution of the aforesaid FIR on 11.4.2003 the husband of petitioner No. 1 (father of the petitioner No. 2) filed complaint Case No. 383/03 on 16.4.2003 under Sections 363, 364 and 365/ 34 of IPC against the present informant and his family members alleging abduction of his son, i.e. presently petitioner No. 2. The parties what would transpire is that both petitioner No. 2 and O.P. No. 2 would be majors. Learned counsel for the petitioners in this context places reliance on a supplementary affidavit and an order dated 9.12.2003 in an anticipatory bail applications (Cr. Misc. No. 26943 and 27010 of 2003) preferred by the present petitioners where O.P. No. 2, wife of petitioner No. 2, would have also appeared before this Court and the factum of her majority would have been recorded.