IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.38310 of 2007 1. CHANDRA SHEKHAR PATHAK @ BACHCHA PATHAK SON OF LATE RAMA KANT PATHAK 2. KAMLA PATHAK, WIFE OF SHRI CHANDRA SHEKHAR PATHAK, BOTH RESIDENTS OF VILLAE SHASTRI NAGAR, BHAWANIPUR ZIRAT, P.S.- CHHATAUNI, IN THE DISTRICT OF EAST CHAMPARAN. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR For the petitioners : Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Abhimanyu Sharma, APP For the O.P. : Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate ----------- 3 16.08.2010 Heard learned counsels for the petitioners, the complainant and the State. Petitioners are father and mother of Aditya Ranjan Pathak @ Ranjan Pathak who is said to have kidnapped the daughter of the informant leading to the filing of an F.I.R. being Chhatauni P.S. case no. 162 of 2005 dated 20.10.2005 instituted under diverse sections of the Penal Code including Section 366A. It appears from the F.I.R. that both the victim girl and the boy were residents of Motihari. The girl was admitted to J.R.S. Tutorial, Varanashi for coaching as she was desirous to become a Doctor. The son of the petitioners kept visiting her regularly. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that on the date of occurrence, the daughter of the informant was kidnapped/abducted by the son of the petitioners for the purpose of marriage. The girl was produced on 12.2.2007 for her statements under section 164 Cr.P.C.. The statement so made by the girl is on record as Annexure-5. It appears that she claimed to be 21 years of age. The court, however, assessed her age as 19 years. In her such statement, she has candidly stated that she fell in 2 love with the son of the petitioners and accordingly, they are now married. Her statement made under Section 164 Cr.P.C., therefore, completely absolves the petitioners herein of the accusation(s)/charge. It is admitted position at the Bar that the wed- lock of the daughter of the informant and the son of the petitioners herein has produced one son and one daughter. The certificate relating to the son and daughter are on record as Annexures-7 and 8 respectively. Learned counsel for the petitioners, with reference to the document placed at Annexure-9, submits that a compromise has already been entered into between both the parties as a result whereof they have been accepted as husband and wife and they are living together as such since then. In these circumstances, it is submitted that the prosecution of the present petitioner requires to be interfered with and quashed. Learned counsel for the petitioners relies on a judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Bajma Khatoon versus State of Bihar since reported in 2004 (3) P.L.J.R. 149 (paragraphs 5, 6 and 7). Learned counsel for the complainant accepts the submissions that have been made on behalf of the petitioners. Learned A.P.P. also fairly states before this Court that the State should not have any objection in allowing this application, if the victim girl and the son of the petitioners are living together as husband and wife and the parents have duly accepted her as their daughter-in-law. It is also submitted that the matter may be remitted back to the Court below for according permission to the 3 compromise so entered into between the parties and filed in this proceeding. I have heard the parties. In my view in the facts and circumstances of the case, continuance of the prosecution shall be unnecessary drain on the public time and resources. The F.I.R. discloses complicity, if any, of the son of the petitioners. Going by the narration made therein, it cannot be said that the parents had any cooperation and/or intention to abduct the victim girl. It further appears that the girl on the basis of assessment made by the Court is a major and was entitled to take her own decisions. It is admitted at the Bar that since then they are living together as husband and wife and in fact the wedlock has produced two siblings. In that situation, if the compromise has been entered into, then there is absolutely no likelihood of the prosecution succeeding at the trial. Under these facts/situation appearing on the record, I am convinced that the continuance of the proceeding shall be sheer abuse of the process of the Court and the same requires to be interfered with and quashed in the ends of justice. Accordingly, the entire proceeding arising out of Chhatauni P.S. case no. 162 of 2005 including the order taking cognizance dated 21.3.2007 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, in so far as the same relates to the petitioners, are quashed and set aside. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )