1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. 23988-M of 2008 Date of Decision: 15.12.2008 *** Manjit Singh & Anr. .. Petitioners Vs. State of Punjab & Ors. .. Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR, Present:- Mr. K.S. Dhaliwal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. B.S. Sra, DAG Punjab. Mr. Baljinder Singh, Advocate for respondent No.3 who is present in person. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. The petitioners are facing prosecution in case FIR No.10 dated 19.2.2007, under Sections 363, 366 IPC, Police Station Batala, District Gurdaspur. Respondent No.2 is the author of the impugned FIR. It has been alleged by her while getting the impugned FIR registered that on 19.2.2007 her daughter Jyoti (respondent No.3) went out to answer the call of nature in the night but did not return and her whereabouts were not traced even after thorough search. She suspect the hand of Manjit Singh and his mother Amarjit Kaur in the elopement of her daughter. Through the instant petition, the petitioners are seeking quashing of the impugned FIR on the ground that the instant case has been got registered by complainant-respondent No.2 with the false allegations and in fact Smt. Jyoti (respondent No.3), the daughter of the complainant, who is major, of her own sweet will joined the company of petitioner No.1 2 and they have married to each other, for which they also filed a Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, seeking protection to their life and liberty. It has further been brought to the notice of this Court that the married couple is living happily and they have been blessed with a child. Affidavit of respondent No.3 Jyoti (Annexure P-3) has been filed in the Court wherein she deposed that her date of birth is 15.4.1989 and she got married with petitioner No.1 on 26.4.2007, as per Sikh Rites and her mother i.e. respondent No.2 who is not happy with this marriage, got registered the impugned FIR against the petitioners on the false allegations. No reply on behalf of State as well as complainant has been filed, rather the complainant has chosen to remain away from the proceedings since none has appeared on her behalf despite service. Today, respondent No.3 has also appeared in the Court and has suffered a statement reiterating the stand taken in the affidavit, as referred to above and has categorically stated that she is living happily with her husband i.e. petitioner No.1 and they are having a male child out of this wedlock. From the above facts, it is clear that Smt. Jyoti, daughter of complainant, with her own wishes has joined the company of petitioners, without there being any inducement on their part. She, as per Annexure P-2 is major and knew well about her right and wrong. In these circumstances, the very foundation of the prosecution i.e. the prosecutrix is when not supporting and has totally demolished its case, in the considered opinion of the case that the continuance of prosecution against the petitioners is nothing else but an exercise in futility and sheer wastage of time of Court. Therefore, in view of the discussion above, the instant petition is allowed. Consequently, the impugned FIR and consequent proceedings taken therein are quashed. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE December 15,2008 Jiten