1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 193 OF 2009 1 Preeti @ Guddi d/o Thakurbhai Agarwal, age: 25 years, Occ: Household, R/o Near New Post Office, Bhagatwadi, Navapur, Tq. Navapur, Dist. Nandurbar. 2 Kailash s/o Prabhubhai Agarwal, age: 48 years, Occ: Business, R/o as above. Petitioners Versus 1 The State of Maharashtra, through Superintendent of Police, Nandurbar. 2 The Police Inspector, Navapur Police Station, Tq. Navapur, Dist.Nandurbar. 3 Manoj s/o Matadin Sharma, age: 29 years, Occ: Business, R/o Shastri Nagar, Navapur, Tq. Navapur, Dist.Nandurbar. Respondents Mr.M.G.Kochar, advocate for petitioners. Mr.Dilip Bankar Patil, A.P.P. for Respondents No.1 & 2. Mr.C.R.Deshpande, advocate for Respondent No.3. 2 CORAM: R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 02nd July, 2009. ORDER: 1 Petitioners are seeking quashment of criminal proceedings initiated in pursuant to lodging of First Information Report bearing Crime No.15/2009 on 15.02.2009 at Navapur Police Station, Taluka Navapur, District Nandurbar, for commission of offences punishable under Sections 362, 365 and 367 of Indian Penal Code. 2 Petitioner no.1 is niece of petitioner no.2. Petitioner no.2 and father of petitioner no.1 run a business in respect of sale of electronic material. The First Information Report is lodged by one Manoj Matadin Sharma. It is stated in the First Information Report that on 31.01.2009 at about 2 O’ clock, his sister by name Minakshi has been abducted by petitioner no.1 Priti @ Guddi d/o Thakurbhai Agarwal and petitioner no.2 Kailash s/o Prabhubhai Agarwal and it is further alleged that Minakshi has been detained at some unknown destination. 3 On perusal of the First Information Report, it transpires that residential houses of informant and petitioners are in the same locality at Navapur. On 31.01.2009, at about 7 O’ clock in the morning, informant had been to his shop and he returned back at 3.30 p.m. After returning back to house, he asked about whereabouts of his sister Minakshi. He was informed by his wife and daughter that at about 2 O’clock, petitioner no.1 3 – Priti had been to their residence and informed that she (Priti) and Minakshi intend to visit a Beauty Parlour and accordingly, they together left the residential house, however, both did not return back. After waiting for some time, informant paid visit to the house of Priti Agarwal. Her brother Niranjan was at his house, so also petitioner no.2 Kailash. Both of them informed the informant that they did not know as to where Minakshi had gone. However, they informed that Priti had left for Nagpur yesterday itself. The informant thereafter inquired about whereabouts of his sister, but she was not found. The informant thereafter paid visit to different places, such as, Baroda, Ahmedabad, Surat, Shirdi and Jalgaon, however, his sister was not found. On 14.02.2009, he received information from one Hirya Poslya, resident of Jamtalav, that his sister Minakshi was spotted at Bus Stand along with petitioner no.1 Priti. The informant, as such, has expressed his suspicion as regards complicity of petitioners in the alleged crime. After registration of the crime, investigation was commenced by the police. 4 Petitioners contend that there is no basis for suspicion harboured by the informant as regards complicity of petitioners in the alleged crime. It is vehemently contended that sister of the informant, on her own accord, appeared before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 37 th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai and tendered Misc. Application bearing No. 02/M/2009, under Section 39 of the Criminal Procedure Code. In the application, Minakshi has contended that she is aged about 22 years and has attained majority and is at present residing at Everest Guest House, Mumbai. In the application, the informant as well as his wife and other relations were made party respondents, so also, Police Station Officer of 4 Police Station Navapur, District Nandurbar, was also impleaded as Respondent. It is prayed in the application to issue a direction to submit detailed report in respect of complaint lodged by Respondents No.1 to 4 with Police Station, Navapur. The applicant has also prayed for stay of investigation in respect of Crime registered at Police Station Navapur, District Nandurbar. It is contended in the application, by Minakshi, that she developed intimacy with one Dinesh Vasant Patil of Surat and she is staying with her husband on her own accord. She has further stated in the application that she had left the house at her own free will and got married with Dinesh Vasant Patil and is presently staying in rented accommodation at Everest Guest House, Colaba. 5 While dealing with the application, the Magistrate has observed that investigation in the crime is domain of police machinery and no interference is permissible. Applicant is expected to appear before concerned Police Station and make necessary statement before police. If it is the contention of applicant (Minakshi) that her family members are causing unnecessary harassment to her, she is expected to seek necessary protection from police machinery. The application, as such, came to be rejected by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 37 th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai on 04.03.2009. 6 Petitioners also contended that Minakshi was produced before the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Navapur on 06.03.2009 and the police officials had requested the Court to send the detenue to Reformation Centre. The detenue (Minakshi) submitted before the Magistrate that she is in love with one Dinesh Vasant Patil and has also 5 performed marriage with him. She has further disclosed her intention to cohabit with him at Mumbai. Considering the fact that detenue Minakshi is adult, the Magistrate has turned down the request made by police officials, however, considering pendency of investigation, directed the detenue (Minakshi) to file an affidavit with the investigating officer disclosing her permanent residential address and to undertake further to inform any change in the address. She was also called upon to cooperate with the investigating machinery. The application, as such, came to be disposed of on 06.03.2009 by Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Navapur, District Nandurbar. Relying upon the order passed by Metropolitan Magistrate, 37 th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai as well as order passed by Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Navapur, it is contended that no offence is made out against petitioners herein and criminal proceedings lodged at the instance of brother of Minakshi are liable to be quashed. 7 Respondent-State has vehemently opposed the petition by presenting affidavit-in-reply sworn by one Ramesh Bhila Sawant, Police Sub Inspector, Local Crime Branch, Nandurbar. It is contended that there is something beyond what meets the eye and further investigation in the crime is necessary and certainly this is not a case wherein criminal proceedings shall be quashed at this stage. The investigating Officer has made available papers of investigation. The story put up by petitioners does not appear to be true. It is contended by petitioners that Priti, petitioner no.1, left for Nagpur on 31.01.2009 and she went alone to meet her mother who was operated upon and was hospitalised. However, considering statement of the Travel agent, contention of petitioner no.1 appears to be laced with falsehood. Petitioner no.1 admits that she had 6 been to Nagpur and proceeded from Jalgaon. The Transporter has disclosed that on 31.01.2009, at about 7.00 p.m., a girl wearing `T’ shirt and Jeans had been to the office of Transport Company and purchased two tickets. The girl, who purchased the tickets, boarded the bus for Nagpur along with another girl who was wearing a black robe. He had identified the person who had purchased the ticket as petitioner no.1 Priti Agrawal. Police have also inquired about whereabouts of alleged husband of Minakshi. The person by name Dinesh Vasant Patil was not found on the given address furnished by Minakshi. On inquiry by police at Surat, it was found that such a person does not reside there, so also the address furnished was also fake. 8 It also transpired, during investigation, that Minakshi was staying at Everest Guest House, Mumbai and entry to that effect finds place in the register maintained by Hotel for 2 nd March 2009 and 3 rd March 2009. It is also disclosed from the record that Minakshi was staying with one Dinesh V. Patil. Statements of employees of hotel are recorded, who have stated that Minakshi was accompanied by a boy who had feminine appearance. The boy in question was wearing Jeans pant and shirt. He alleged to have made entry in the register and entered his name as Dinesh Vasant Patil, aged 25 years. The witness was called at the office of Local Crime Branch at Nandurbar and said witness had seen Priti @ Guddi Agarwal from a distance. He has categorically disclosed to the police that appearance of the girl in question i.e. Priti is strikingly identical with that of Dinesh V. Patil, who had paid visit to the hotel. The police have every suspicion that the person, who has presented himself as `Dinesh Vasant Patil’, is in fact Priti @ Guddi. From the photographs shown during 7 the course of arguments, suspicion raised by investigating machinery appears to have some merit. 9 It is also to be taken note of that the police had made extensive search but could not find the person by name `Dinesh V. Patil’ on the given address nor Minakshi has ever presented said person. The police have serious doubt that the girl in question is lured into flesh trade. The police have also collected record in respect of Everest Guest House. It transpires that several cases under PITA Act were lodged against the Management of Everest Guest House, in the past. 10 There is another aspect which needs anxious consideration and which necessitates further investigation by the police in the alleged crime. A Missing Complaint was lodged in the year 2002 in respect of disappearance of Priti i.e. Petitioner no.1 along with one Sharifabee d/o Mohd. Mulla, aged 27 years. Subsequently, Sharifabee was traced and she gave a statement to the police to the effect that she had left her home because of allurement extended by Priti Agrawal. She has stated that she does not remember as to where she had gone along with Priti nor remembers as to when and how she came back. Statement of girl Sharifabee was recorded by police on 24.04.2009. It has also been informed by the Investigating Officer that there are about 4/5 similar instances in respect of missing girls occurred in recent past at Navapur. 11 Considering seriousness of the allegations and considering material collected by the Investigating Officer, I am of the considered opinion that this is not a fit case for causing interference in ongoing police 8 investigation, at this stage. There are several other factors which are disclosed from investigation, which calls for an extensive probe in the matter. However, considering the sensitive nature of the allegations, it is not proper to disclose the material collected by investigating machinery, at this stage. Suffice it to say that this is not a fit case for causing interference in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction by this Court. Petition is devoid of substance. 12 Hence, Petition stands rejected. (R.M.BORDE) JUDGE ******* adb/criwp19309