Ajit Kumar, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsels for the parties.
(2.) By means of this criminal misc. application under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as 'Cr.P.C.'), the applicant has questioned the charge sheet dated 17.09.2015 and cognizance order dated 08.12.2015 in Case No. 10839/9 of 2015, State v. Habiburrahman arising out of Case Crime No. 701 of 2015, under Sections 386, 506 IPC, P.S. Khatauli,District Muzaffarnagar pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarnagar on the ground that the applicant has been falsely implicated only because he happens to be the Uncle of Shoaib son of Sardar Ahmad with whom the daughter of the first informant namely Anju Rani eloped and later married by converting to Islam religion and styling herself as Anjum Rehman.
(3.) It is contended that initially the opposite party no. 2 lodged the first information report (hereinafter to be referred as 'FIR') on 18.05.2015 which was registered as Case Crime No. 523 of 2015, under Sections 363, 366, 504, 506 IPC. The said FIR came to be challenged before this Court by Anjum Rahman and Shoaib and others vide Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 13183 of 2015 and this Court vide order dated 01.06.2015 directed for no coercive measure pursuant to the FIR until further orders. The order passed by this Court is reproduced hereunder: "Learned AGA has accepted notice on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 3. Issue notice to respondent no. 4. Six weeks time is accorded to each one of the respondent to file counter affidavit.Two weeks further time is accorded to file rejoinder affidavit. List this matter after eight weeks. It has been submitted by petitioner no. 1 Anjum Rehman @ Anju Rani d/o Naresh Kumar, who has been identified by Mohd. Parvez Alam, Advocate, that she has voluntarily left her parental house and has entered into matrimonial alliance with petitioner no. 2 Shoaib s/o Sardar Ahmed. Petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are stating before this Court that they are major and on their own free will, they have entered into matrimonial alliance and they are living happily with each other and as far as petitioner nos. 3 to 5 are concerned, they are close relatives of petitioner no. 2 and, as such, in view of the judgment of Apex Court rendered in Criminal Appeal No. 1142 of 2013, Sachin Pawar Versus State of U.P., decided on 02.08.2013, it cannot be said by any stretch of imagination that any offence under sections 366, 504 and 506 I.P.C. is made out. Prima facie the arguments, that have been so advanced before this Court, appears to have some substance and requires consideration by this Court, as such, pursuant to the FIR dated 22.5.2015 registered as Case Crime No. 523 of 2015 under Sections 366/504/506 IPC at police station Khatauli, district Muzaffarnagar, until further orders of this Court no coercive action be taken against the petitioners.";