MUSTAQ AND ANR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS
LAWS(P&H)-2012-11-578
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on November 23,2012

MUSTAQ AND ANR Appellant
VERSUS
State Of Haryana And Ors Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Tersely, the facts and material, culminating in the commencement, relevant for deciding the instant petition and emanating from the record, are that Mustaq (petitioner No.1) is relative of complainant Mubarik respondent No.4 (for brevity "the complainant"). The prosecution claimed that on 13.1.2010 at about 6 PM., as soon as, Rubeena (petitioner No.2), sister of the complainant, had gone to answer the call of nature outside the village, in the meantime, Mustaq accused (petitioner No.1) met and misled her. He was stated to have enticed her away with the intention to marry, on his motorcycle to some unknown place. In the background of these allegations and in the wake of complaint of the complainant, a criminal case was registered against petitioner No.1, vide FIR, bearing No.28 dated 29.1.2010 (Annexure P3), on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 363 & 366-A IPC by the police of Police Station Ferozepur Jhirka, District Mewat, in the manner depicted here-in-above.
(2.) The petitioner No.1 (accused) did not feel satisfied with the initiation of criminal case against him. He and his wife Rubeena (petitioner No.2), sister of the complainant, have preferred the present petition for quashing the impugned FIR (Annexure P3) and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, invoking the provisions of Section 482 Cr.PC, inter-alia pleading that the parties are Muslim by caste. Petitioner No.2 had fallen in love with petitioner No.1. She was major and voluntarily solemnized her marriage with him, by virtue of marriage certificate (Nikahnama) (Annexure P2). After solemnization of the marriage, they are happily residing as husband & wife.
(3.) Leveling a variety of allegations and narrating the sequence of events in detail, in all, the petitioners have sought to quash the impugned FIR (Annexure P3) and all other consequent proceedings arising thereto, inter-alia, on the following grounds:- i) The impugned FIR No.28/2010 dt.29/1/2010 (Annexure P3) is absolutely fake and fabricated and it can be well assessed by going through the FIR simply that nothing of the incident as narrated therein can ever take place. Therefore, the FIR deserves to be quashed and set aside. ii) The respondent No.4 wants to sell the petitioner No.2 to some unknown person, who is of no match to the petitioner No.2 in her age as well as in her qualification and for the same reason, the FIR has been lodged by the respondent No.4. The respondent No.4 wanted to grab big and huge amount from the person of his choice with whom he wanted to marry the petitioner No.2 and the same was against her will and wish. The petitioner No.2 has willingly married with Mustaq, petitioner No.1, therefore, the impugned FIR lodged by respondent No.4 has got no substance and the same is based on false and fabricated facts and nothing of the sought has ever happened as narrated by him in the FIR, therefore, the same deserves to be quashed and set aside. iii)The petitioners have already given a notice for demand of justice through her counsel to all the respondents regarding the contents of the FIR as well as regarding the marriage of the petitioner, which was conducted by the petitioner according to her will and wish. Therefore, the impugned FIR deserves to be quashed and set aside (Annexure P5). iv)The petitioner No.2 has now given a birth to a male child. Regarding the birth of the child, the certificate issued by competent authority is also marked her as Annexure P-4, but the respondent, the police authorities of District Mewat as well as the police personnels of PS Jurhera, Distt. Bharatpur are disturbing the peaceful life of the petitioners and also of the nears and dears knowing the fact that the they have voluntarily married. The respondent No.2 & 3 are chasing the petitioner from time to time and wants to still hand over the petitioner no.2 to the custody of respondent no.4. Therefore, this action of the respondents is against the legal provisions of the constitution as well as the FIR has got no substance and the same deserves to be quashed and set aside.";


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.