AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
49 paragraphs · 924 wordsThe present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.236/2018 registered at Police Station Kotkasim, Alwar for
the offence under Section 365 IPC.
The learned Public Prosecutor on instructions from Bhagwan Sahai Sharma, SHO, P.S. Kotkasim, Alwar has submitted that Smt. Pooja Tiwari
petitioner no.2 victim is aged more than 18 years.
This Court on 27.7.2018 had passed the following order:-
“Issue notice to the respondents. On the asking of the Court, Mr.Prakash Thakuria, Public Prosecutor accepts notice on behalf of respondents
Nos.1 & 2.
Respondent No.2 â€" SHO, through Mr. Prakash Thakuriya Public Prosecutor is directed to serve notice upon respondent No.3 regarding pendency
of the present petition and the next date fixed before this court.
Meanwhile, Deputy Registrar (Judicial) is directed to record the statement of petitioner No.2 â€" Smt. Pooja Tiwari, today itself, upon identification by
the Counsel.
To await statement of petitioner No.2 recorded by Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court, list the present petition on 08.08.2018.
On that date, Investigating Officer, along with the records shall remain present in person before this Court.
Meanwhile, the further proceedings arising out of impugned FIR shall remain stayed.
A further direction is issued to respondent No.2 to ensure necessary vigil that no harm is caused to the life and liberty of the petitioners.
Name of Mr. Prakash Thakuriya, Public Prosecutor be reflected in the cause list as counsel for the respondent Nos.1 & 2.
Copy of this order be handed over to Mr. Prakash Thakuria, P.P., under the seal and signature fo the Court Master for onward transmission and
necessary compliance.â€
In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the statement of Smt. Pooja Tiwari has been recorded by Dy. Registrar (Judicial) of this Court and the same is
taken on record. For ready reference, the said statement is reproduced below:-
“jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky; ihB] t;iqj
,l0ch0fØehuy fel0 ihfV’ku uEcj 4308@2018 ';ke fogkjh o vU; cuke ljdkj o vU;
fnukad 27-07-2018
eSa iwtk frokjh iq=h Jh jru yky] vk;q yxHkx 20 o""kZ] tkfr czkg~e.k] fuoklh&egs’ojh gkml u0 149] jsokM+h] gfj;k.kk] gky fuoklh&xkao tjkjk] rglhy
ekV] ftyk eFkqjk] mRrj izns’kA
'kiFk iwoZd c;ku djrh gWw fd ';ke fogkjh dks eSa fiNys nks lky ls tkurh gWwA ';ke fogkjh ls esjh eqykdkr ejs h nksLr us djok;h Fkh rc ls eSa budks
tkurh gWwA ge nksuksa ,d nwljs dks ilan djrs Fks vkSj 'kknh djuk pkgrs FksA ';ke fogkjh ls 'kknh djus dh ckr eSaus vius ?kjokyksa dks Hkh crk;h Fkh
ysfdu ejs s ?kjokyksa us bl ckr dk dksbZ tokc ugha fn;kA blfy, fnukad 07 ekpZ 2018Â dks eSa dkWyst ds fy, fudyh vkSj ogha ls esa ';ke fogkjh ds ikl
pyh xbZA ogka ls ge nksuksa xkft;kckn x, vkSj vk;Z lekt efUnj esa geus 'kknh dj yhA 'kknh dk geus iath;u Hkh djok fy;k gSA mlds ckn eSa okil vius ?
kj vk xbZA 'kknh dh ckr eSaus ?kj ij fdlh dks ugha crkbZA fnukad 17 ebZ 2018 dks eSa ';ke fogkjh ds ikl okil pyh xbZA mlds ckn esus vius ?kj ij Qksu
djs crk;k fd eSaus ';ke fogkjh ds ikl okil pyh xbZA mlds ckn eSusa vius ?kj ij Qksu djds crk;k fd eSaus ';ke fogkjh ds lkFk 'kknh dj yh gS vkSj
vHkh eSa muds lkFk gh gwWA bl ckr ij ejs s ?kjokyksa us eq>s ;g vk’oklu fn;k fd rqe ?kj vk tkvksa ge ';ke fogkjh ds lkFk jhfr fjokt ds lkFk
rqEgkjh 'kknh djok nsaxsaA bl dkj.k ls eSa vius ?kj pyh xbZA ?kj ij ?kjokyksa us eq>s iwjs fnu le>k;k fd rqeus tks 'kknh dh gS oks xyr gS vkSj eq> ij
ncko cuk;s j[kk fd rqe ';ke fogkjh ls rykd ys yksA bl ncko vkSj volkn dh voLFkk esa ? kjokyksa us eq>ls fdlh dkxt ij gLrk{kj Hkh djok fy, FksA ckn
esa eq>s irk pyk fd ;g dkxt rks ';ke fogkjh ij Qkstnkjh eqdnek ntZ djokusa ds fy, FkkA ;g eqdnek ejs s ?kjokyksa vkSj fj’rsnkjksa us /kks[ks ls
ejs s ls gLrk{kj djokdj ntZ djok;k gS eSA ;g eqdnek Hkh okil ysuk pkgrh gWwA orZeku esa eSa ';ke fogkjh ds lkFk muds ? kj ij gh jg jgh gwWA esjs
HkkbZ vf’ouh us esjs vigj.k dh tks fjiksVZ iqfyl Fkkuk dksV dkfle esa ntZ djok;h gS og fcYdqy >wBh gSA iqfyl okysa Hkh ejs s ifr ,oa ejs s
llqjky okyksa dks cgqr ijs’kku dj jgsa gSA eSa pkgrh gWw fd iqfyl okyksa dks Hkh ikcan fd;k tk, fd os gesa ijs’kku u djs vkSj gesa iqfyl lqj{kk
Hkh iznku djok;h tk,A eSa Lo;a dh bPNk ls ';ke fogkjh ds lkFk 'kknh dh gSA Hkfo""; esa Hkh ge nksuksa ifr ifRu ds :i esa lkFk lkFk jguk pkgrs gSA
eq>sa vkSj dqN ugha dguk gSA
uksV%& xokg dk c;ku esjs funsZ’ku esa mlds dgs vuqlkj Vad.kdrkZ }kjk dEI;wVj ij Vafdr fd;k x;k] ftls xokg dks ik;k x;k rks
mlus mDr dFkuksa dks lqu o le> dj lgh gksuk Lohdkj fd;kA
vkj0vks0,.M ,0lh0
 fMIVh jftLVªkj ¼U;kf;d½â€
Taking into account the statement made by petitioner No.2, reproduced above, and the statement made by the Investigating Officer that Smt. Pooja
Tiwari has attained age of majority, this Court is of the view that the continuation of the proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR are misuse and
abuse of process of law, as Smt. Pooja Tiwari is free to reside wherever she wishes and she has also right to perform marriage as per her own
accord.
Consequently, the present petition is accepted and the impugned FIR alongwith all subsequent proceedings is quashed.
