Criminal Misc. M No. 1959 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. M No. 1959 of 2009 Date of Decision: May 28, 2009 Rajnish @ Babban ...........Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ..........Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina Present: Mr.Rupam K Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Sidharath Sarup,Assistant Advocate General, Haryana Mr.Nakul Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.4 ** Sabina, J. Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR 49 dated 22.2.2006 under Sections 363, 366 of the Indian Penal Code (`IPC' for short) registered at Police Station Mujesar, Faridabad (Annexure P1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom. The allegations as per the FIR (Annexure P1) are as under:- “It is stated that I am Vijay Kumar Patil s/o Sh. Sangsteppa Caste Pandit r/o House No. 2708, Gali No.24, Sanjay Colony, Faridabad. My daughter Sukhnaini who studied in 12th Class in Urmila School, Rajnish @ Babban s/o Sh.Mohan Parsad, Caste Saini, r/o H.No.2704, MCF, Sanjay Colony, Faridabad who reside in my neighbourhood and used to teach tuition to my daughter Criminal Misc. M No. 1959 of 2009 2 Sukhnaini at his residence. On 18.2.2006 my daughter Sukhnaini had gone to Rajnish but after tuition she did not come to the house. When my wife Bhagyakala after waiting of my daughter when went to the house of Rajnish then mother of Rajnish told her that today Sukhnaini did not come for the tuition and Rajnish has also gone out of the house. When I returned my home around 8.00 P.M. my wife told me the whole incident. I have confirmed that abovementioned Rajnish has ran away with my daughter Sukhnaini whose age is 17 years 3 months and who is minor with the intention of marriage. The legal action be taken against Rajnish Kumar. I have searched my daughter here and there but I could not find her." Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that, in-fact, petitioner and Sukhnaini, daughter of respondent No.4 had got married. The marriage certificate in this regard is Annexure P2 dated 5.12.2008. On the last date, respondent No.4 was present in person but today none has appeared on his behalf. Sukhnaini, daughter of respondent No.4 is present in person along with her child and has been identified by ASI Surinder Singh, who has come to assist the State Counsel. Sukhnaini has stated that now she was married to petitioner and they had been blessed with a child and she is happily residing with the petitioner. It has been held by the Apex Court in State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) Supreme Court cases 335, as under:- “The following categories of cases can be stated by way of illustration wherein the extraordinary power under Criminal Misc. M No. 1959 of 2009 3 Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482, Cr.P.C. Can be exercised by the High Court either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently chennelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases whereinsuch power should be exercised:- (1)Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complainant, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (2)Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1)of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (3)Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do no disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (4)Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a Police Criminal Misc. M No. 1959 of 2009 4 Officer without an order of Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (5)Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (6)Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of aggrieved party. (7)Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceedings is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” The present case has its own peculiar facts. FIR in question was got registered by respondent No.4 against the petitioner on 22.2.2006 under Sections 363, 366 IPC. However, now petitioner and Sukhnaini, daughter of respondent No.4 have performed their marriage on 28.10.2006. In these circumstances, continuation of criminal proceedings would jeopardise their married life and the ends of justice require that the criminal proceedings are quashed. Moreover, no useful purpose would be served by continuing with the criminal proceedings any further. Criminal Misc. M No. 1959 of 2009 5 Accordingly, this petition is allowed. FIR in question i.e. 49 dated 22.2.2006 registered under Sections 363,366 IPC at Police Station Mujesar, Faridabad (Annexure P1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioners are quashed. (Sabina) Judge May 28, 2009 arya