- (1.) The compendium of facts and material, culminating in the commencement, relevant for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant petition and emanating from the record, is that on 27.1.2011 at about 9 A.M., Kamalpreet Kaur alias Preeti (respondent No.2) had gone to school on her Activa Scooter as usual. She did not return home by evening. Complainant Gurpreet Singh alias Vicky respondent No.3, her brother-in-law (gainer) (for brevity "the complainant") and others searched for her, but in vain. Subsequently, they came to know that she was enticed away by the petitioners -accused with the promise/intention to marry her with Sajjan Verma (petitioner No.2). She was stated to have taken golden bangles, lady set and cash with her, while leaving the parental house. In the background of these allegations and in the wake of statement of the complainant, the present case was registered against the petitioners-accused, vide FIR, bearing No.9 dated 30.1.2011, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366-A and 120-B IPC by the police of Police Station Division No.2, Ludhiana, in the manner indicated hereinabove.
(2.) The petitioners-accused did not feel satisfied with the registration of criminal case against them and preferred the instant petition for quashing the FIR and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, invoking the provisions of Section 482 Cr.PC, inter-alia pleading that petitioner No.2 and respondent No.2, who are major, had fallen in love since long and intended to marry. The complainant party was against this love marriage. Kamalpreet Kaur, of her own accord, had left the parental house voluntarily to marry with petitioner No.2. Her date of birth is 15.11.1992 as per middle standard examination certificate (Annexure P1). She solemnized the marriage with petitioner No.2 on 2.2.2011 with her free consent and without any kind of pressure as per the marriage certificate (Annexure P2). Apprehending arrest to their lives and liberty, they filed a joint protection petition (CRM No.M-3961 of 2011) in this Court, which is clear from the order dated 8.2.2011 (Annexure P3).
(3.) Levelling a variety of allegations and narrating the sequence of events, in all, according to the petitioners that Kamalpreet Kaur was major. She herself left the parental house voluntarily and performed the marriage with petitioner No.2 with her own free will and without any kind of pressure. In this manner, no offence whatsoever is made out against the petitioners. On the strength of the aforesaid grounds, they sought to quash the FIR and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, in the manner described hereinbefore.;