IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.2533 of 2007 DATE:03.06.2010 Between: Mohd. Arshad …… Petitioner/Accused. And: State of A.P. rep., by Public Prosecutor, And another. …..Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.2533 of 2007 ORDER: The petitioner/A-1 is accused of offence punishable under Section 363 I.P.C in Crime No.61/2007 of Habeebnagar Police Station, Hyderabad. The 2nd respondent/defacto-complainant is father of the alleged victim girl Farhana. It is alleged that on 12.03.2007 the girl went to school and did not return from school and that when the 2nd respondent enquired, he was informed that the girl was taken away in a Toyata Qualis vehicle. In report dated 13.03.2007 given by the 2nd respondent to the police, the girl was described as of 15 years of age. Now, the 2nd respondent contends that the girl was of the age of 12 years 4 months and 5 days as per school certificate. It is contention of the petitioner that when the 2nd respondent tried to sell the girl to a Arab Shaik, the girl came away to A-1 as they were in love with each other and that subsequently the girl and A-1 married each other in respect of which marriage certificate was issued by Chief Quazi of the A.P. State Wakf Board, Hyderabad. Subsequently both the alleged victim girl Farhana and A-1 filed O.P. No.223 of 2007 in the Family Court, Hyderabad against the 2nd respondent and also filed I.A. No.292 of 2007 therein and obtained exparte interim injunction order against the 2nd respondent restraining him or anybody on his behalf from enterfering with marital life of the petitioners therein until further orders. The petitioner filed certified copy of the said interim injunction order before this Court. 2) It is contended by the 2nd respondent’s counsel that marriage is not true and that in any event, the girl is not eligible for marriage as per Muslim Law, because she was not having sound state of mind. He contends that two essential requirements of a muslim marriage for a girl is that she should have attained puberty and that she should possess sound state of mind. There is no dispute about the girl attaining puberty by the date of marriage. The 2nd respondent did not allege in the report given to the police that his daughter was not having sound state of mind, apart from she being a minor aged 15 years. As noted in order passed by the Family Court, the girl was aged 19 years as per her own description. As rightly stated by the 2nd respondent’s counsel, age of the girl is not the criterion to determine validity of her marriage. In any event this criminal Court cannot go into validity of the marriage of A-1 with the girl in this criminal petition. It is for the Family Court to decide the said fact. As the matter now stands it is evident that it is not a case of kidnapping, but it is a case of love affair and the girl voluntarily left company of her father and joined A-1. Thus, there is no prima facie case of offence punishable under Section 363 I.P.C against the petitioner/A-1. 3) In the result, the petition is allowed quashing F.I.R in Crime No.61/2007 of Habibnagar Police Station, Hyderabad against the petitioner/A-1. _______________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J June 3, 2010 KSH