Babloo @APPELLANT@Hash State of Rajasthan & Ors

Petitioner Babloo Son of Shri Ramji Lal has preferred this petition with a prayer to quash criminal proceedings in respect of criminal case No.

37/2010 (State Vs. Ramesh & Ors.) pending before the court of Additional District & Sessions Judge No. 2, Bayana, District Bharatpur arising out of

FIR No. 123/2009 registered with Police Station Uchchain, Bharatpur for the offence punishable under Section 363, 366, 120-B of IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner Babloo solemnized his marriage with Shakuntla @ Payal D/o Bhogiram on

23.05.2009 in Arya Samaj Mandir, Pratap Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur and both the spouses were major at the time of their marriage since date of birth of

Shakuntla is 01.01.1991 and she had attained age of majority at the time of her marriage, because father of Smt. Shakuntla @ Payal was not

agreeable to the marriage, so a false FIR has been lodged against Babloo. The couple is living comfortably after marriage and two siblings have born

out of the wedlock, since investigating agency has furnished charge sheet against some of the accused persons, a threat is hovering upon the petitioner

of being arrested. The petitioner has wrongly been shown to be a “fugitive†without committing any crime, so the proceedings of case No. 37/10

pending before the court of Additional District & Sessions No. 2, Bayana, Bharatpur be quashed.

Learned Public Prosecutor has contended that nothing wrong has been conducted by investigating agency because Shankuntla @ Payal was minor at

the time of the incidence, so the petition deserved to be dismissed.

Heard rival contentions and perused the record.

Appraisal of the record goes to show that date of birth of Shakuntla @ Payal is 01.01.1991 and school certificate to this effect has been issued by

Principal of Government Senior Upadhyaya Sanskrit Vidhyalaya, Bharatpur with a copy of scholar register, reflecting that date of birth of Shakuntla

d/o Bhogiram and Smt. Premwati r/o Saidpura is 01.01.1991. Copy of statements of prosecutrix Shakuntla recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.

dated 21.11.2009 also convey the same because Shakuntla @ Payal d/o Bhogiram has stated that she had gone on her own, her father has lodged a

false FIR, she has also stated that she has been subjected to beatings by family members and has also stated that she is major of 18 years of age.

Prosecutrix Shakuntla @ Payal has been examined by Doctors of Government Rajbahadur Memorial Hospital, Bharatpur on 19.11.2009 and on the

basis of ossification test, she has been opined to be of 20-21 years of age on the basis of radiological examination report No. 136/2009.

Relevant it is, to observe that the couple had earlier preferred SB Civil Misc. Petition No. 2224/2011 before this court and a      Co-

ordinate Bench of this court, while passing order on 10.01.2014 has observed:-

Petitioners have filed this writ petition for a direction to respondents not to harass, torture and humiliate them as well as parents and relatives of

petitioner no.2 in future. Further prayer is made for a direction to respondents no.1 to 4 to provide them protection to protect the matrimonial life of

petitioners from parents of petitioner no.1. Petitioner No.1 Payal @ Shakuntla, who is major, got married to petitioner no.2 Bablu, who is also major,

on 23.05.2009 in Arya Samaj Mandir, Pratap Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur. It was out of their free will and choice. After their marriage, father of

petitioner no.1 lodged an F.I.R. No.123/2009 against petitioner no.2 at Police Station Uchchain, District Bharatpur, on 03.06.2009 Mother of petitioner

no.1 also lodged F.I.R. No.31/2010 against petitioner no.2 on 02.03.2010 on same allegation. Petitioner no.1 submitted an affidavit stating that she

wants to live with petitioner no.2 and her parents have lodged false report.

On 29.11.2012 this court required petitioner no.1 to appear before the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this court on 07.12.2012, who was directed to

record her statement. Her statement was recorded by the Deputy Registrar (Judl.) on that date and the same is on record. She has stated her date of

birth to be 01.01.1991. She was familiar with petitioner no.2 Bablu. They contacted marriage out of their free will and choice on 23.05.2009 and they

are living happily as husband and wife. Out of this wedlock, she gave birth to a female child on 25.01.2012. She further stated that she went with

petitioner no.2 Bablu out of her free will.

Petitioners are major and decided to marry with each other out of their free will. Petitioner no.1, being major, is free to marry anyone she likes or live

with anyone she likes.

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no.3 â€" the Superintendent of Police, Bharatpur, to ensure their

safety and provide police protection, whenever they desire. Station House Officer of the concerned Police Station shall also ensure police protection to

the petitioners.

It also establishes the contention raised under the instant petition and Superintendent of Police, Bharatpur has been directed to ensure safety of couple

and has also been ordered to provide police protection to the petitioner.

Petitioner Babloo has solemnized his marriage with Shakuntla @ Payal and both the spouses are major. Certificate issued by Principal Government

Senior Upadhyay Sanskrit Vidhyalaya, Saidpura and copy of scholar register does reveals that date of birth of Shankuntla @ payal d/o Bhogiram has

been 01.01.1991, Shankuntla @ Payal has herself stated in her statements recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. that she had gone of her own and

she was not seduced by anybody, she has even stated that her father has lodged a false FIR, ossification test conducted does also assure that

Shakuntla was major and aging between 20-21 years of age at the time of medical examination.

Marriage of two major individuals solemnized against the wishes of anybody, cannot be termed to be a reason to put legal machinery in motion. Couple

is living peacefully and comfortably, even they have got two siblings born out of the wedlock.

Considering the afore-delineated and discussed fact situation, criminal proceedings sub-judice against petitioner Babloo are oppressive and are

uncalled for since he is not a “fugitive†and to keep said proceedings pending hitherto will not less than an abuse of the process, fate of the same

can very well be perceived as well being doom.

Therefore, this petition is allowed and proceedings against the present petitioner Babloo S/o Ramjilal arisen out of FIR No. 123/2009 P.S. Uchhain

being criminal proceedings in the shape of criminal case No. 37/2010 State Vs. Ramesh and Ors, are quashed to the extent of present petition Babloo

S/o Shri Ramgilal.

Let a copy of this order be transmitted to learned court below for necessary information and compliance.

The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.