Harsh Vandana @ Hema vs State of Punjab

Bakhshish Kaur, J.

Harsh Vandanapetitioner has filed this petition for quashing FIR No. 24 dated 1.7.1999 registered at PS Model Town, Ludhiana under Sections 365/366 IPC.

The present case against Ratish Mohan Sharma was registered on the statement of Dheeraj Kumar, respondent No. 2, who is brother of Harsh Vandana alias Heenapetitioner. According to her, she had married Ratish Mohan Sharma according to Sikh rites in Jalandhar city. The marriage was registered. Annexure P.2 is the marriage certificate. She is 21 years old and she has married Ratish Mohan Sharma on her own accord. She was not abducted or taken away forcibly by Ratish Mohan Sharma.

Since the petitioner as well as Ratish Mohan Sharma and the complainant Dheeraj Kumar were present, their statements were recorded. Both Retish Mohan Sharma and the petitioner Harsh Vandana have stated on oath that their marriage was solemnized according to Sikh rites. They are living together at Garshukar, Dharamshala as husband and wife since November 30, 1998. Dheeraj Kumarcomplainant in his separate statement has stated that Ratish Mohan Sharma and Harsh Vandana have been living together since September, 1998 as in November, 1998 Ratish Mohan Sharma had visited their house at Nirwana. They had only one grievance against the petitioner as well as Ratish Mohan Sharma that Ratish Mohan Sharma does not allow Harsh Vandana to meet them and they did not disclose the correct address as to where they are living. He has no more grievance against them nor he intends to proceed further in the case which was registered on his statement vide FIR No. 24 dated 1.7.1999 under Sections 365/366 at PS Model Town Ludhiana and the same may be quashed.

From the facts brought on the record and the circumstances of the case, it can be spelt out that parents of Harsh Vandana were not happy with her marriage with Ratish Mohan Sharma. Therefore, they have got registered the case against him. Harsh Vandana is major and she has categorically stated that she had been living with Ratish Mohan Sharma since their marriage as his wife. In order to abridge the strained relations between the complainant and the petitioner, the interests of justice demand that no further action needs be taken in pursuance of the FIR as the continuation of the proceedings flowing therefrom may mar the good relations between the parties and also that the evidence if any, brought on record would not be sufficient to warrant conviction against Ratish Mohan Sharma, more so when the complainant has stated that he has no more grievance against him and that they had only one grievance against Ratish Mohan Sharma that the petitioner and his parents are not allowed to meet her. Since Ratish Mohan Sharma had made a statement that he would not have any objection if the complainant along with him and his parents visit her.

In view of the above discussion, this petition is accepted and FIR No. 24 dated 1.7.1999 under Sections 365/366 IPC registered at PS Model Town, Ludhiana, is hereby quashed.