Criminal Misc. No. 14375-M of 2008 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Criminal Misc. No. 14375-M of 2008 Date of Decision: 9.4.2010 Sandeep Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and Others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Bhullar, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, for respondent No.1. None for respondents No.2 and 3. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No. 141 dated 23.4.2008, registered at Police Station Phase-I, Mohali, under Sections 363 and 366 IPC along with all the subsequent proceedings. The impugned FIR has been annexed as Annexure P2. A perusal of the FIR reveals that Hira Lal, complainant stated that his eldest daughter Nirmala, aged 17 years, had eloped with Sandeep Kumar, petitioner. A grievance was made that Sandeep had enticed away his daughter on 13.4.2008. She, being minor, was taken away from the lawful custody of her parents and thus an offence under Sections 363 and 366 IPC was committed. Criminal Misc. No. 14375-M of 2008 2 In the present petition, photographs (Annexure P1) have been annexed which reveal that the marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with Nirmala, daughter of the complainant. On 30.5.2008, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had passed the following order:- “In this case, prosecution was launched by Hira Lal, father of Nirmala-respondent No.3 alleging that on April 13, 2008, Sandeep Kumar-petitioner enticed her in order to marry her. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner married Nirmala, of- course, against the wishes of her parents. She is major. They are leading a happy married life. Notice of motion for 29.07.2008. Meanwhile, further proceedings qua petitioner Sandeep Kumar before the trial Court are stayed”. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from Baldev Raj, Head Constable, Police Station Nayagaon, submits that the petitioner and Nirmala, respondent No.3, are living as husband and wife. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment rendered by this Court in Swaran Singh alias Gaganpreet Singh v. State of Punjab and Others (Criminal Misc. No. 43454-M of 2007, decided on 28.4.2008) to contend that even a marriage is performed by a girl who is less than 18 years of age and continuation of the proceedings will be an abuse of process of law. Criminal Misc. No. 14375-M of 2008 3 In the present case, marriage between the petitioner and daughter of complainant/respondent No.2 is two years old. Hence, continuation of FIR will serve no useful purpose. Thus, the present petition is accepted and impugned FIR along with all the subsequent proceedings is quashed. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge April 9, 2010 “DK”