IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.732 of 2009 KAILASH SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 3/ 19.3.2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petition seeks the setting aside of orders passed by Smt. Shobha Trivedi, Judicial Magistrate – Ist Class, Vaishali at Hajipur on 24.10.2005 in Complaint Case no. 422 of 2005 by which the petition of complaint of the petitioner was dismissed as also order dated 25th August, 2008, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC I, Vaishali, Hajipur in Cr. Revision No. 285 of 2005. I do not want to reiterate the facts of the case and evidence which was led on the petition of complaint during the course of enquiry under section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as they are discussed in detail in the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. What I want to point out is that there is vast difference between ‘enticing’ or ‘taking away’ a lady and a lady ‘herself eloping’ from her matrimonial house or from her lawful guardianship, which was pointed out by the Supreme Court in the case of S. Vardarajan Vs. State of Madras, AIR 1965 SC 942. I have also rendered a judgment in a criminal appeal which has been reported in 2010 (1) BLJ 249 (PHC) basing the same on the case of S. Vardarajan (supra). The Supreme Court pointed out that a simple case of elopement may not be an offence which has been 2 defined by section 361 of the IPC and which has been made punishable under section 366A of the IPC. On the facts which have been adduced on the records of the court below, this appears clearly a case of elopement of a lady aged about 22 years. The complaint petition and the revision were rightly dismissed. This petition is also dismissed as such. Anil/ ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)