Prayagraj, Allahabad High Court has quashed a kidnapping case registered against a man on the complaint of his wife's uncle after the couple eloped and said the judicial magistrate should send the adult petitioner back to his parents' home. was wrong, even though he expressed fear for it. His life there.
"No one can prevent an adult from going anywhere of his choice, living with a person of his choice or marrying as per his wish or desire as this is a right which derives from Article 21 of the Constitution. Which provides protection to life and personal liberty,” the court said.
The woman, aged about 21, had married the man as per Muslim customs in April 2024, in respect of whom the Telangana State Waqf Board had issued a marriage certificate.
The woman's uncle lodged an FIR against her husband under IPC section 363 (kidnapping).After this, the police not only arrested her husband but also took the woman into custody and handed her over to her uncle.
When the police produced the woman before the magistrate to record her statement under section 164 of the CrPC, she clearly said that she had married a man of her own choice and her husband had been implicated in a false case.
Subsequently, the couple jointly challenged the FIR before the High Court.
A bench of Justices JJ Munir and Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal said that the Judicial Magistrate had sent the woman to her uncle's house despite her statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), adding that she had threatened her life on being sent. Had expressed fear of being in danger. His uncle/parents' house.
The court said that the judicial magistrate, before whom the first petitioner woman had claimed that she feared for her life because her uncle had threatened to kill her, had a duty to lodge an FIR against the uncle, as well Take adequate measures for his safety.Safety and life of the first petitioner.
Emphasizing that honor killing in such cases is not an unknown phenomenon", the court said the Superintendent of Police, Siddharth Nagar and the Station House Officer, Police Station-Bansi, Siddharth Nagar District are equally responsible for not taking action against the woman. Was fully accountable. Uncle should protect the life and property of the woman by registering a proper FIR.
Making the above comment, the court quashed the FIR against the husband.In the June 7 judgment, the court also directed the authorities concerned to ensure that his uncle or any other family member does not harm him in any way. , Raj RT
RT
"No one can prevent an adult from going anywhere of his choice, living with a person of his choice or marrying as per his wish or desire as this is a right which derives from Article 21 of the Constitution. Which provides protection to life and personal liberty,” the court said.
The woman, aged about 21, had married the man as per Muslim customs in April 2024, in respect of whom the Telangana State Waqf Board had issued a marriage certificate.
The woman's uncle lodged an FIR against her husband under IPC section 363 (kidnapping).After this, the police not only arrested her husband but also took the woman into custody and handed her over to her uncle.
When the police produced the woman before the magistrate to record her statement under section 164 of the CrPC, she clearly said that she had married a man of her own choice and her husband had been implicated in a false case.
Subsequently, the couple jointly challenged the FIR before the High Court.
A bench of Justices JJ Munir and Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal said that the Judicial Magistrate had sent the woman to her uncle's house despite her statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), adding that she had threatened her life on being sent. Had expressed fear of being in danger. His uncle/parents' house.
The court said that the judicial magistrate, before whom the first petitioner woman had claimed that she feared for her life because her uncle had threatened to kill her, had a duty to lodge an FIR against the uncle, as well Take adequate measures for his safety.Safety and life of the first petitioner.
Emphasizing that honor killing in such cases is not an unknown phenomenon", the court said the Superintendent of Police, Siddharth Nagar and the Station House Officer, Police Station-Bansi, Siddharth Nagar District are equally responsible for not taking action against the woman. Was fully accountable. Uncle should protect the life and property of the woman by registering a proper FIR.
Making the above comment, the court quashed the FIR against the husband.In the June 7 judgment, the court also directed the authorities concerned to ensure that his uncle or any other family member does not harm him in any way. , Raj RT
RT
