IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.9521 of 2010 MD. AMINUDDIN KHAN @ AMINUDDIN AHAMAD KHAN @ GOLDEN, SON OF ANUDDIN AHAMAD KHAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE – PADROWNA, P.S. – BARHARIA, DISTRICT – SIWAN ……………………………………………………… PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, 2. SHOHAIL RAIS, SON OF RAIS ALAM KHAN, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA – CHOUDHARY GALI, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA – SAMAN PURA, P.S. SHASTRI NAGAR, DISTRICT – PATNA, 3. ZAINAB RAYEES KHAN, WIFE OF MD. AMINUDDIN KHAN @ AMINUDDIN AHAMAD KHAN @ GOLDEN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE – PADROWNA, P.S. – BARHARIA, DISTRICT – SIWAN …………………………………………….. OPPOSITE PARTIES. ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Dudhnath Singh, Advocate. For the Opposite parties: Mr. Binod Kumar No. 2, A.P.P. ----------- 2. 19.03.2010. Invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the criminal proceeding forming the subject matter of Shashtri Nagar P.S. Case No. 518 of 2009 instituted for offences punishable under Section 366A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short `the IPC’). 2 It is contended that one Shohail Rais had filed a report alleging that the petitioner had kidnapped his sister with the aid and assistance of his parents. On the basis of the First Information Report, investigation took place and eventually it had given rise to G.R. No. 6545 of 2009 which is pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna. It is put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the First Information Report and the material on record would clearly reveal that `Nikah’ has been performed between the petitioner and the sister of the informant. It is alleged that the parents of the petitioner had approached this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 45693 of 2009 and this Court appreciating the factual matrix in the affidavit sworn by the informant has quashed the criminal proceeding. I have heard Mr. Dudhnath Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Binod Kumar No. 2, learned counsel for the State. Be it noted, the factual matrix is not in dispute. This Court in Cr. Misc. 45693 of 2009 has passed the 3 following order: “This application has been filed for quashing the F.I.R. of Shastrinagar PS Case No. 518 of 2009 for the offences under sections 366A/34 of the Penal Code. Initially the informant who is brother of Zainab Rais had instituted the present case on the ground that Zainab Rais had been kidnapped by Md. Aminuddin Khan (not petitioner), son of petitioner no. 1. After the family met Zainab, they realized that she had left her house out of her own free well and she is happily married and living with Md. Aminuddin Khan. The petitioners are father-in-law and mother-in-law of Zainab Rais and they are in no way responsible for the said Act. Besides this, since the informant has sworn affidavit saying that the family has no objection to the marriage, it would not be proper to continue with this criminal proceeding and as such the F.I.R. of Shastrinagar PS Case No. 518/2009 stands quashed as far as these petitioners are concerned.” In view of the aforesaid I am of the considered opinion there is no justification to continue the criminal proceeding against the petitioner and, accordingly, further 4 proceeding in G.R. No. 6545 of 2009, pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna is quashed. The application is accordingly allowed. Dilip ( Dipak Misra, C.J. )