Date : 17/02/2012 1. Present petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the petitioners herein - original accused to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Inquiry Case No.81 of 2008 filed by the respondent No.2 herein – original complainant who happens to be mother of the Girl named Gayatriben, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Kheralu, for the offences punishable under sections 366, 368, 504, 506(2) and 114 of Indian Penal Code.
2. It appears that the respondent No.2 herein – ordinal complainant - mother of the Gayatriben who was major at the relevant time, has instituted the aforesaid Inquiry Case No.81 of 2008 in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Kheralu against the petitioners herein and others – original accused, for the offences punishable under sections 366, 368, 504, 506(2) and 114 of Indian Penal Code alleging inter- alia that the petitioners have kidnapped and/or abducted her daughter named Gayatri aged about 20 years at the relevant time, and thereby the accused have committed the offences, as alleged in the aforesaid complaint.
3. It appears that in the said complaint the learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Kheralu passed an order for police investigation under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and directed the investigating officer of Kheralu Police Station to investigate the complaint and submit the report. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid, the petitioners herein – original accused have preferred the present petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
4. Mr.Keyur Vyas, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners has submitted that as such the petitioners have not committed any offence, much less the offences alleged in the impugned complaint. He has submitted that as such the daughter of the complainant named Gayatri, who was aged about 20 years at the relevant time, had run away / gone with the petitioner No.1 herein as she was in love with the petitioner No.1 and subsequently the petitioner No.1 and daughter of the complainant have married and their marriage is also registered and out of the marriage, they have one child.
5. Mr.Keyur Vyas, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners – original accused has further submitted that even subsequently the original complainant has accepted the marriage of the petitioner No.1 and her daughter named Gayatri and as such now there is no dispute between the parties.
6. Mr.Keyur Vyas, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners – original accused has stated at the bar, under the instructions of his counterpart that even after completion of the investigation, the investigating officer has submitted C-Summary which is pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Kheralu for consideration.
7. Mr.Keyur Vyas, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners – original accused has further submitted that under the circumstances, to continue the criminal proceedings against the petitioners - accused would be unnecessary harassment to the petitioners and it will not be in the interest of parties also.
8. It is reported that the respondent No.2 – original complainant is unserved. Under the circumstances in absence of the original complainant, it is not possible for this Court to quash the impugned complaint proceedings / criminal inquiry. If the respondent No.2 – original complainant would have been here, this Court would have considered the case on merits and in the facts and circumstances of the case, would have quashed and set aside the impugned complaint. However, in view of the above and in absence of the respondent No.2 – original complainant and the fact that now C-Summary is submitted by the investigating officer which is pending before the learned Magistrate, without further entering into the merits of the case present petition can be disposed of by directing the learned Magistrate to consider the C-Summary Report submitted by the investigating officer and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Magistrate may accept the same, after ascertaining the facts narrated hereinabove that the parties have settled the dispute; the petitioner No.1 and daughter of the complainant have married and out of the said marriage they have one child.
9. In view of the above, present petition is disposed of by directing the learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Kheralu to consider the C-Summary Report and pass appropriate order, as aforesaid. However, such exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of writ of the present judgement and order. Rule is discharged.
rafik Direct Service is permitted.
Sd/-
[M.R. SHAH, J.]