- (1.) TODAY, learned counsel for the State has placed before us the order dated 3.7.2012 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP(CRL.) No.4720/2012, Amna alias Rashmi Tanwar and Anr v/s State of Rajasthan, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has passed an interim order as follows : "In the meanwhile, there shall be stay of arrest of the petitioners in connection with FIR No.101/12 dated 14.5.12 registered at P.S. Adarsh Nagar, District Jaipur and as an interim measure, we direct the SSP of District Tonk and the SSP of District Jaipur to provide protection to the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners is permitted to file a petition to implead the complainant as one of the respondent."
(2.) THIS habeas corpus petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging that his daughter has been forcibly taken away by the respondents No. 5, 6 and 7 on 6.5.2012 and for which an FIR was lodged by him bearing No.101/2012 at Police Station Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur on 14.5.2012 for offence u/s 363 and 366 IPC. It was the submission before us in this habeas corpus petition that the respondents should be directed to produce the daughter of the petitioner before the court by way of habeas corpus petition as the police has failed to recover her from the accused person. It has been brought to our notice that Smt. Amna alias Rashmi Tanwar and respondent No.5 herein, Mohammed Azim Khan S/o Shri Mohammed Sharafat Khan, R/o Ghol Kafilai Masjid, Tonk approached this court by means of petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the FIR NO.101/2012 dated 14.5.2012 registered at Police Station Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur. Learned Single Judge before whom the matter came, directed that the petitioners, named hereinabove, are free to approach the Investigating Officer and produce the documents as well as to record and their statement before the I.O. and the IO shall complete the investigation and submit the result of the investigation before the concerned Magistrate. With the aforesaid observation the petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. (S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.1669/2012) was disposed of vide order dated 21.5.2012. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the State that it is against the aforesaid order that the daughter of petitioner as well as the respondent No.5 have approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the SLP in which the interim order has been passed on 3.7.2012 which has been quoted hereinabove. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that at least since there is stay on the arrest, the daughter of the petitioner should be produced before the court and the petitioner who is the father be allowed to meet her and speak to her. We are of the view that since the Hon'ble Supreme Court is seized of the matter and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has given direction for the present petitioner to be impleaded as a party in the SLP, it would be open for the petitioner to approach the Hon'ble Supreme Court and make the aforesaid request before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is a possibility that the petition may not have been filed voluntarily by the daughter of the petitioner cannot be ruled out or that the petition may have been filed on her behalf using her name and identity by some third person including the respondents No. 5 to 7 herein who are arrayed as accused in the FIR No.101/2012 as even the learned Single Judge did not give any opportunity of hearing to this petitioner and the accused may be forcing the daughter of the petitioner to present the petition in court to escape their arrest. So far as the aforesaid submission is concerned, we are of the view that in the facts and circumstances of the case and more particularly in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court which is already seized of the matter, the aforesaid submissions can be made by the petitioner before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
(3.) IN view of the above, this habeas corpus petition stands disposed of. In case the petitioner feels that despite the final order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court the matter requires to be heard for the purpose of habeas corpus on the basis of any direction passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it would be open for the petitioner to approach this court in the light of the said direction.;