High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/44821/2016allowed

Ali @ Gopi & ANR v. State Of Punjab & ORS

2017-04-20Mrs. Justice Raj Rahul Garg2 pages

Crl. Misc. No. M-44821 of 2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. 12713-2017 in/and Crl. Misc. No. M-44821 of 2016 Date of decision : 20.04.2017 Ali @ Gapi and anr.

......Petitioners versus State of Punjab and ors.

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

Present:

Mr. Ravi Malhotra, Advocate for the petitioner Mr A.P.S. Gill, AAG, Punjab Mr. Ashish Bakshi, Advocate for respondent No. 2 and 3 **** RITU BAHRI , J. (Oral) Crl. Misc. No. 12713-2017 Application is allowed as prayed for.

Accordingly, Annexure P-2 and P-3 are taken on record. Crl. Misc. No. M-44821 of 2016 Petitioner is seeking quashing of FIR No.30, dated 24.04.2016, registered at Police Station Lambra, District Jalandhar Rural, under Sections 363/366-A IPC on the ground that he has solemnized marriage with respondent No.3, Jalina @ Jalekha, when she was 16 years of old and she is residing happily in her matrimonial house. Under the Muslim Law a girl can give her consent for marriage at the age of 15. Further as per statement of respondent No. 2 and 3, it has been admitted that the petitioner has neither kidnapped her nor has committed wrong act with the prosecutrix. She is living happily with him. Respondent GAURAV ARORA 2017.04.25 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Crl. Misc. No. M-44821 of 2016 No. 2 and 3 further stated that they have no objection if the bail of the petitioner is allowed.

Keeping in view the fact that now respondent No. 3 is residing happily with the petitioner, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.30, dated 24.04.2016, registered at Police Station Lambra, District Jalandhar Rural, under Sections 363/366-A IPC is quashed along with all consequential proceedings qua petitioner, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 429 and the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and another 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052 as no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation once the daughter of the complainant is residing happily with the petitioner as his wife. 20.04.2017 (RITU BAHRI) G Arora JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No GAURAV ARORA 2017.04.25 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh