By Rajesh Pandey
While quashing an FIR alleging kidnapping, the Allahabad High Court has said that no one can restrain an adult from going anywhere that he/she likes, staying with a person of his/her choice, or solemnising marriage according to his/ her will or wish as this is a right which flows from Article 21 of the Constitution, which provides protection of life and personal liberty.
While making this observation, a division bench comprising Justice JJ Munir and Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal criticised a judicial magistrate for sending an adult woman, who is first petitioner in this case to her uncle’s home after the uncle, who is third respondent and had lodged an FIR against her husband, who is second petitioner in this case.
The judicial magistrate had sent the woman to her uncle’s home despite her statement under section 164 of the criminal procedure code (CrPC), wherein she had expressed fear for her life if sent to her uncle/parent’s home.
The court further added that the judicial magistrate, before whom the first petitioner lady claimed that she feared for her life because her uncle had threatened to do her death, was duty bound to get an FIR registered against the uncle, besides taking adequate measures to secure the safety and life of the first petitioner.
Emphasising that the honour killing in such matters is not an unknown phenomenon”, the court added that the superintendent of police, Siddharth Nagar and the station house officer, police station-Bansi, Siddharth Nagar district were equally answerable for not taking action against the woman’s uncle by registering an appropriate FIR and safeguarding the woman’s life and security.
The first petitioner was an adult woman aged about 21 years who married an adult man of her choice as per her own free will and wish according to Muslim rites in April 2024, regarding which the Telangana state waqf board issued a marriage certificate.
Aggrieved with her decision to marry second petitioner, the woman’s uncle lodged an FIR against her husband under section 363 (kidnapping) of IPC. Thereafter, 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 get her statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC, she categorically said that she had married second petitioner of her own choice and that her husband had been implicated in the case falsely.
Subsequently, the petitioners jointly challenged the FIR before the high court.
While making above observations, the court quashed the FIR, while noting that the impugned FRI contained uncontroverted allegations, which did not make out a case against the accused.
In addition, the court directed to the superintendent of police, Siddharthnagar and the station house officer, police station-Bansi of Siddharthnagar district to ensure that the woman goes wherever she likes and stays with whomsoever she wants, without any hindrance from her uncle or any other family member.
In a decision dated June 7, the court also directed the concerned officers to ensure that her uncle or any other family member does not harm her in any manner.
