Kumari Kanchan vs State of Rajasthan

Sunil Kumar Garg, J.—Since a very short point is involved, the Public Prosecutor present in the court is directed to take notice and the petition is heard finally.

This Cr. Misc. petition u/s 482 Cr. P.C. has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer that the order dated 3.4.2001 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Jataran by which he ordered that the petitioner be sent to Women Protection Home, Jaipur be set aside.

It arises, in the following circumstances.

A report was lodged by Shri Bhanwar Lal in the Police Station, Jaitaran on 2.5.2000 and the same was registered as FIR No. 102/2000 for offence Under Sections 363 and 366 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(XII) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. It is alleged in the report that the petitioner was kidnapped by Amar Singh in Nov., 1999 and again on 16.4.2000.

During pendency of investigation, the petitioner herself came to the police Station, Jaitaran and police took her in its possession and produced her before the Magistrate for the purpose of recording of her statement u/s 164 Cr. P.C. and it was prayed that till her statement is recorded, she be sent to Women Protection Home, Jaipur. The learned Magistrate accepted the prayer of the police and ordered that she be sent to Women Protection Home, Jaipur.

That part of the order dated 3.4.2001 passed by the learned Judl. Magistrate, Jaitaran has been challenged in this petition.

It may be stated here that on 4.4.2001, after passing the impugned order dated 3.4.2001, the learned Magistrate recorded the statement of the prosecutrix wherein she has stated that she was not kidnapped by the accused Amar Singh and now she intends to go with her parents.

Since on the date when the impugned order dated 3.4.2001 was passed, the petitioner was not accused in any case, but on the contrary, she was a witness as prosecutrix and, therefore, her liberty cannot be curtailed in any manner and thus passing of the order by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Jaitaran dated 3.4.2001 by which petitioner was sent to Women Protection Home, Jaipur is without jurisdiction.

The Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Devi v. Superindent, Nori Niketan, Delhi reported in 1976 CAR (SC) 171 has held that sending of a woman in Nari Niketan is nothing but to put restriction on her liberty. From this point of view also, the impugned order dated 3.4.2001 cannot be sustained and justified.

For the reasons mentioned above, this misc. petition is allowed and the order dated 3.4.2001 passed by the learned Judl. Magistrate, Jaitaran by which the petitioner was sent to Women Protection Home, Jaipur is set aside and she may be set at free to move anywhere as per her choice if not set at free so far.