High CourtsDS(2017) 04 RAJ CK 0126

Suo Motu vs State of Raj. Through Secretary,, Department of Home Jaipur (Raj.)

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 28 April 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gopal Krishan Vyas, G.R. Moolchandani
RESULT
Disposed
CASE NUMBER
4266 of 2017

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

169 paragraphs · 1,569 words
1.

In pursuance of the directions issued by this Court on

24.04.2014, present SHO, and the then SHO of Police Station-

Shiv, District-Barmer, are present-in-person, so also, the

Pancha(s) of ''Kumawat'' community of Village Gunda, against

whom bailable warrants were issued for securing their presence,

are also present in person.

2.

A pointed query was made from the members of ''Kumawat''

community, present-in-person, as to why they expelled the

complainant and his family from their community, and as to why

they compelled the complainant to solemnize marriage of his

minor daughter with a person who is more than 30 years of age.

All the members of the community, present-in-person, submitted

before the Court that the complainant and his family members

have not been expelled from the community, nor any action has

been taken against him to expel or banish from the community. It

is also submitted that no undue pressure was laid by them for the

marriage of his daughter, Champa Kumari, with Basta Ram, and

the marriage was solemnized as per willingness of the

complainant. It is further submitted that all the allegations levelled

by him are false and concocted. With regard to taking 5,00,000/-

rupees, it is submitted that this allegation is also unfounded

because the complainant himself is a poor man and he is not in a

position to pay such a huge amount, therefore, all the allegations

levelled by the complainant, Gena Ram, are false.

3.

Mr. Mukesh Rajpurohit, learned counsel appearing on behalf

of Pancha(s) of ''Kumawat'' community are ready to file their

affidavits before this Court that the complainant, Gena Ram, has

not been banished or ousted from the community and he is still

member of ''Kumawat'' community and no person will be ousted or

banished from the community in future also.

4.

Mr. S.K. Vyas, learned Additional Advocate General

appearing on behalf of respondent- State submitted that proper

investigation was carried out in the FIR lodged by complainant,

Gena Ram and in the investigation, the allegations levelled were

not found to be true, therefore, final report (FR No.17/2016) was

filed on 29.04.2016 in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate,

Barmer, which is pending. It is also submitted that in the

investigation of police the marriage was solemnized with the

consent of the complainant and Genaram was not expelled from

the community nor any demand to pay Rs.25 lacs was made from

him. More so, the complainant, Gena Ram, himself did not attend

the ceremony of the society and submitted before the

Investigating Officer that compromise has been arrived at

between him and Pancha(s) of his community, now no grievance

left for taking action upon the allegations levelled by him.

Therefore, the instant writ petition may kindly be dismissed.

5.

After hearing the complainant, who is present-in-person, and

counsel for the Pancha(s) and Additional Advocate General, it

emerges from the facts that in the FIR No.118/2016 statements of

Champa Kumar, minor daughter of complainant were recorded u/s

164 Cr.P.C . on 05.07.2016, in which following allegations were

levelled by her:

"VERNACULAR MATTER OMITTED"

6.

Along with compliance report submitted by the police certain

photographs of marriage and marriage card are placed on record

for perusal of the Court. The compliance report is hereby taken on

record. Along with report, a copy of the mark-sheet of Basta Ram,

is produced for perusal of the Court, in which the date of birth of

Basta Ram, is 15.03.1988, meaning thereby on the date of

marriage, Basta Ram, was more than 28 years of age and

daughter of complainant was only 17 years of age. In the

statements recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C ., Champa Kumari (daughter

of complainant) by the learned A.C.J.M., Barmer, there is

allegation of forcible marriage, inspite of that, the police filed FR in

the court, against that protest petition has been filed by the

complainant, wherein statements of the witnesses including

Champa Kumari have been recorded u/s 202 of Cr.P.C . by learned

Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Barmer.

7.

Upon consideration of entire material available on record, we

are of the opinion that inspite of statements of Champa Kumari

recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the police filed FR, in which

protest petition was filed by the complainant, wherein statements

of witnesses have been recorded u/s 202 Cr.P.C . and the matter is

still under consideration for taking cognizance in the matter.

8.

The members of ''Kumawat'' community who were summoned

through bailable warrants filed their affidavits and submitted that

the complainant has not been ousted or banished from their

community and in future also, they will not punish any member of

community and maintain peace. Verbatim language is used in the

affidavit by all the members, present in the court. The affidavit of

one of the member, viz. Gunesha Ram S/o Chanda Ram, reads as

under:

"VERNACULAR MATTER OMITTED"

9.

All the affidavits filed by the members of ''Kumawat''

community are hereby taken on record.

10.

Upon the statements made by the members of ''Kumawat''

community, present-in-person, and upon the fact that

complainant has not been expelled or banished from the

community and assurance being given by the ''Pancha''(s) that in

future the complainant or any person will not be ousted from the

community, therefore, it is obvious that grievance of the

complainant-Gena Ram, to remain in the community has been

redressed, therefore, no further directions is required to issued in

this regard.

11.

In view of the fact that inspite of statements of minor

daughter of complainant recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C ., the Police has

filed FR before the court concerned, in which proceedings upon

protest petition are going on. The entire facts clearly reveal that

for the inaction on the part of the police, a minor girl become

victim of child marriage and complainant and his minor daughter

are approaching from pillar to post. It is obvious from the fact that

she belongs to a poor family, therefore, upon request made by the

complainant, we deem it appropriate to direct the District Level

Service Authority, Barmer, to provide legal assistance to minor girl

for filing a petition for declaring her marriage void in the

competent court as per Hindu Marriage Act . The amicus curiae

shall be appointed for the said purpose to conduct her case for

declaring the said marriage void. Furthermore, there is scheme

formulated known as ''Victim Compensation Scheme, 2011, framed

by the State Government pursuant to the directions of Hon''ble

Supreme Court, therefore, considering the facts of the case, we

are of the opinion that Champa Kumari (victim) is entitled for

compensation under the said Scheme because due to inaction on

the part of police inspite of her statements recorded u/s 164

Cr.P.C ., FR was filed in the court in connection with F.I.R.

No.118/2016, and at present a minor girl is living with his poor

father, therefore, to securing her future, we deem it appropriate

to direct the District Legal Service Authority, Barmer, to provide

her interim compensation of Rs.1,21,000/- because proceedings

upon protest petition is pending in the court concerned.

12.

In view of above, the instant writ petition is disposed of with

following directions: -

1.

The SHO, Police Station- Shiv, District Barmer, is

directed to provide adequate security to the

complainant, his minor daughter, Champa Kumari,

including his family members as and when required.

2.

The learned A.C.J.M., Barmer, before whom

proceedings upon protest petition filed by the

complainant against the FR submitted by the police

in FIR No.118/2016 dated 18.06.2016 registered at

Police Station Shiv, District Barmer, going on, shall

consider the statements recorded under Section 202

Cr.P.C. and the statements of Champa Kumari

recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C . during trial and pass final

order with regard to prayer of taking cognizance

strictly in accordance with law within two months.

3.

The District Legal Service Authority, Barmer, is

directed to pay interim compensation of

Rs.1,21,000/- to victim Ms. Champa Kumari under

the Victim Compensation Scheme, 2011. The

aforesaid amount may be deposited in the name of

Ms. Champa Kumar in a Fixed Deposit in a

nationalized Bank near to her village-Gunga,

initially for a period of three years and the interest

accrued thereon, shall be paid to her monthly. For

the said purpose a Bank account may be opened in

the name of Ms. Champa Kumari. It is further

directed that after expiry of three years, the amount

kept in Fixed Deposit may be disbursed to Champa

Kumari for her welfare.

4.

The District Legal Service Authority, Barmer, shall

provide legal assistance to Champa Kumar,

daughter of complainant, for declaring her marriage

with Basta Ram to be void, in the competent court

and amicus curiae may also be appointed in this

regard. 5. The Superintendent of Police, Barmer, is directed to

ensure that no child marriage is solemnized in the

area on the eve of ''Aakhateej'' onwards.

6.

In view of the fact birth registration is necessary,

for which an application form is provided by the

State Government, therefore, the State Government

is directed to incorporate a condition in the

application form for registration of birth of child,

itself that the person applying for issuance of birth

certificate shall file an affidavit/undertaking stating

therein that he/she shall not marry their son or

daughter, until and unless, they attain the age of 21

years (in the case of male child) or 18 years (in the

case of female child), as the case may be.