- (1.) Petitioner has preferred the present misc. petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the FIR No.193/2018 registered at Police Station Padukalan, District Nagaur for offence under Section 363 IPC.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has shown the order dated 16.5.2019 passed by this Court in D.B. Habeas Corpus Petition No.89/2019, which reads as under :- "The petitioner Kana Ram claims to be involved in a love affair with the corpus Mst. "S". Her date of birth is 01.01.2001. Both of them eloped with each other on 16.11.2018. The father of the girl Shri Sukh Ram lodged an FIR No.193/2018 at Police Station Padukalan District Nagaur on 17.11.2018 for offence under Section 363 IPC. The girl continued to remain in the company of the petitioner and no sooner had she completed the age of 18 years, she and the petitioner married each other at Vedic Hindu Sabha, Branch Office Sundar Puri, Ghaziabad on 18.01.2019. The marriage was registered before the Registrar of Marriages, Ghaziabad as is evident from the Certificate of Registration of Marriage annexed with the habeas corpus petition. The petitioner as well as Mst. "S" appeared before this Court and filed a Criminal Misc. Petition No.1496/2019 apprehending harm at the hands of the relatives of the girl. In presence of the petitioners therein, this Court passed an order dated 15.03.2019 directing the Superintendent of Police, Nagaur to hear the grievance of the petitioners and provide them adequate security and protection, if necessitated. The girl appeared before the SHO PS Padukalan on 12.04.2019. Rather than reporting the matter to the SP Nagaur, the SHO PS Padukalan took it upon himself to proceed with the matter. The girl was shown recovered. Fard Dastyabi was prepared. Her statement was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Upon a pertinent query being put to Shri Sunil Choudhary, SHO PS Padukalan, Nagaur, he stated to this Court that he gave intimation to SP Nagaur that the girl had appeared before him with an order wherein direction was given to SP Nagaur to hear the parties and to provide adequate security and protection to them. On the contrary, a bare perusal of the case diary reveals that the SHO made no effort whatsoever to apprise the SP Nagaur of this development. In total ignorance of this Court's order dated 15.03.2019, he proceeded to prepare a recovery memo (Fard Dastyabi) of the girl. Her statement was recorded in the premises of the Police Station Padukalan and the girl was kept under the supervision of a female constable. The girl categorically stated that she eloped with the present petitioner of her free will and volition. Both went to Delhi and Ghaziabad and contracted marriage with each other at Arya Samaj on 18.01.2019. The marriage was got registered. She gave information to her parents that she had married Kana Ram on which they threatened that both she and Kana Ram would be killed. On this, she filed a petition in the High Court wherein the protection order was passed. She stated that she wanted to live with Kana Ram and was not desirous of going with her parents. Despite the fact that the girl was major on the date she appeared at the Police Station Padukalan, she was presented to the Child Welfare Committee which observed that the girl was a major and it had no jurisdiction to pass any order qua her. The SHO thereafter called the parents of the girl and handed over the custody of the girl to them. A pertinent note is made in the case diary that the girl was firm on her stand that she was not desirous of going with her parents despite that the SHO after the Child Welfare Committee had shaken its hands of the controversy, released the girl and manifestly sent her with her parents without providing any kind of security. The girl's statement was got recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. on 18.04.2019 and in such statement as well, the girl though in the custody of the parents categorically stated that she had married Kana Ram in the Arya Samaj. There is no allegation that the marriage was forced. From these facts and circumstances, we are of the firm opinion that Shri Sunil Choudhary, SHO PS Padukalan has acted in gross dereliction of duties. Copy of this order shall be forwarded to DGP Jaipur for taking appropriate disciplinary action against him. On conferring with the girl, we are of the view that she is under severe pressure. Thus, we direct that she shall be sent to Nari Niketan, Jodhpur so that she can get time to contemplate without being unduly influenced. Shri Choudhary, Advocate representing the respondent No.6 has drawn our attention to this Court's order dated 19.11.2018 passed in D.B. Habeas Corpus Petition No.172/2018 and urges that the instant habeas corpus petition is not maintainable. On having perused the said order and deliberating the facts of the present case, we are of the firm opinion that both cases are totally distinguishable on facts. In the present case, our observation is very clear and candid that the girl who was provided protection by this Court's order was handed over in custody of her parents by an officer who was not authorized to do so. On conferring with the girl, we have noticed that she is under severe pressure. Thus, we are not persuaded with the submission of Shri Choudhary that the writ petition is not maintainable. The girl shall be produced in the court on the next date of hearing. List on 27.05.2019."
(3.) The facts of the case indicate that there was a consensual relationship between the petitioner and the prosecutrix. However, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present misc. petition is disposed of with a direction to the concerned investigating authority to complete the investigation. However, the petitioner shall not be arrested in the present case. The petitioner shall be required to join investigation as and when called for. At any juncture, if during the investigation, the concerned investigating authority needs to arrest the petitioner, then the petitioner shall be given 15 days' notice before making such arrest.;