IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (C-482) No. 714 of 2011 1. Himmat Lal S/o late Bhartu 2. Isam S/o late Bhartu 3. Smt. Sunita W/o Isham 4. Km. Salu (minor) D/o Isam through her natural guardian and Father Sri Isham 5. Jony (minor) S/o Pawan through his natural guardian and Father Pawan All R/o village Brahmpur, P.S. Kotwali Roorkee, District Hardwar. ………………..Applicants Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand, through Home Secretary, Dehradun 2. Ram Singh S/o Lal Singh R/o village Brahmpur, P.S. Kotwali Roorkee, District Hardwar. …………........Respondents Shri Lokpal Singh, Advocate, present for the petitioners Shri B.S.Parihar, Brief Holder, present for the State. 2 Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard. (2) By means of this petition, moved under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners have sought quashing of the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 5057 of 2011 State vs. Himmat and others, relating to offences punishable under section 363, 366, 506 I.P.C., (arisen out of crime no. 284 of 2010), police station kotwali, Roorkee, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee. (3) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioner no.1 Himmat Lal got married with Poonam (daughter of respondent no.2/complainant) on 14.06.2010. It is further pointed out that marriage between the two was registered with Registrar, Hindu Marriage. Copy of certificate of said marriage is annexed as Annexure-1 to the petition. It is also pointed out that Poonam was major as is clear from copy of the report of Chief Medical Officer. It is also 3 submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the girl (Poonam) was examined under section 164 of Cr.p.C., and she clearly stated that she had got married with petitioner no.1 Himmat Lal on her own volition. It is also pointed out that complainant (respondent no.2) is step father of the Poonam. It is further pleaded that Poonam, and Himmat Lal are living happy married life. It is argued that it is abuse of process of law on the part of the respondent no.2 to implicate the petitioner no.1, and his relatives in a criminal case relating to kidnapping and abduction of Poonam. (4) Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners, and learned counsel for the State, and after going through the certified copies of the relevant documents, this court finds that it is a clear case of abuse of process of law. There is yet another fact which is on the record. It appears that Poonam (girl said to have been abducted) herself filed criminal writ petition no. 627 of 2010 seeking protection from her step father and others, who were against her marriage 4 with Himmat Lal. Said petition was disposed of by this court vide order dated 29.07.2010. (5) In the circumstances, and for the reasons as discussed above, this petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C., is allowed. Proceedings of Criminal Case No. 5057 of 2011 State vs. Himmat and others, relating to offences punishable under section 363, 366, 506 I.P.C., (arisen out of crime no. 284 of 2010), police station kotwali, Roorkee, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee, are hereby quashed. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt.09.08.2011 N.P