FIR quashed as continuation of criminal proceedings constitutes abuse of process where victim voluntarily married accused.

The petitioner sought to quash FIR C.R. No. I-27 of 2019 registered at Wankaner Police Station for alleged kidnapping of a minor

The complainant (the victim's father) alleged that on 06.04.2019, his daughter, then aged 17 years and 10 months, went missing from their labor quarters and was allegedly fled away by the petitioner

However, the victim claimed she left voluntarily with her Aadhaar card to marry the petitioner

Upon attaining majority on 05.07.2019, the couple solemnized a Hindu marriage in Madhya Pradesh

At the time of the hearing, the couple was living together with two minor daughters

The victim filed an affidavit and gave a statement under Section 164 of the CrPC supporting the petitioner

1. Whether the criminal proceedings for kidnapping and abduction under the IPC and the Atrocities Act should be quashed when the victim voluntarily entered into a matrimonial relationship with the accused after attaining majority

2. Whether the continuation of the FIR constitutes an abuse of the process of law in light of the settled matrimonial life of the parties

The Court exercised its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which allows the High Court to quash proceedings to prevent abuse of the process of law or to secure the ends of justice

The court considered Sections 363 (kidnapping) and 366 (abducting a woman to compel marriage) of the Indian Penal Code, alongside Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

The court applied the principle that where the victim of an alleged kidnapping later marries the accused and leads a happy marital life, the criminal prosecution for acts committed during her minority may be quashed to protect the matrimonial harmony and the welfare of children

The Court analyzed the victim’s testimony and the subsequent developments in the relationship. It noted that the victim’s statement under Section 164 of the CrPC categorically denied any inducement or kidnapping, asserting that she left her parental home of her own free will

The Court found that the FIR was likely a result of the father’s opposition to an inter-caste marriage rather than a criminal act by the petitioner

Relying on the victim's refusal to support the prosecution, the Court determined that the legal proceedings would only serve to "unnecessarily disturb the settled matrimonial life" and "adversely affect the welfare of their two minor daughters"

The Court allowed the application and quashed FIR C.R. No. I-27/2019 and all consequential proceedings

The relief was granted on the grounds of securing justice and preserving the family unit, as the victim was "happily settled in her matrimonial life"