Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/9271/2020allowed

Balakrishnan v. The Inspector Of Police

2022-03-09Honourable Mr Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan2 pages

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.9271 of 2020 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 09.03.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.O.P.(MD) No.9271 of 2020 in Crl.M.P.(MD) No.4350 of 2020

1. Balakrishnan

2. Murugan

3. Ponnuthayee W/o. Murugan

4. Rengaraj

5. Ponnuthayee W/o. Rengaraj

...Petitioners/

Accused No.1 to 5 Vs.

1. State represented by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Manaparai Police Station, Trichy District.

(Cr.No.8/2020) ...1st Respondent/ Complainant

2. The District Welfare Officer, Child Marriage Prevention Office, District Collector Office Campus, Trichy District.

...2nd Respondent/ Defacto Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying this Court to call for the records relating to FIR in Crime No.8 of 2020 dated 14.05.2020 on the file of the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Manaparai, Trichy District and quash the same as against the petitioner.

For R1 & R2 : Mr.M.Aasha Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

ORDER

The petition has been filed to quash the FIR registered in crime No.8 of 2020 for the offences under Sections 9 and 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.

2.The first accused is the bride groom and his parents are A2 and A3. The bride's parents are A4 and A5. Accused 2 to 5 had arranged marriage between A1 and the victim girl, aged about 17 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.9271 of 2020 years. Upon the receipt of the information from the second respondent with regard to commission of offence by the accused persons, the first respondent registered the case in FIR in Crime No.8 of 2020 for the offences under Sections 9 and 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006. Immediately, when the information of registration of FIR came to the knowledge of the accused 2 to 5 herein, they stopped the marriage since the victim girl has not attained the age of majority. Infact, they were considered for anticipatory bail since the alleged marriage was not solemnized and it has been stopped after registration of FIR. 3.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.

Side) appearing for the respondents stated that now, the victim girl attained age of majority and got married with the first accused and living happily. 4.Under these circumstances, mere pendency of the FIR in Crime No.8 of 2020 will not serve any purpose. Therefore, the criminal original petition is allowed and the FIR in Crime No.8/2020 on the file of R1 is quashed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) lr Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

1. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Manaparai Police Station,Trichy District.

2. The District Welfare Officer, Child Marriage Prevention Office, District Collector Office Campus,Trichy District.

3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.9271 of 2020 09.03.2022 MGJ(07.04.2022) 2P 4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2