1. RULE. Ms. Monali Bhatt, learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule for respondent No.1 and Ms. Khyati Chuk, learned advocate waives service of notice of rule for respondent No.2.

2. With the consent of learned advocates for both the parties, the matter has been heard finally.

3. By filing this application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the applicants seek to quash and set aside the FIR being C.R.No.I-39 of 2017 registered with Vejalpur Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 452, 506(2) read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. Brief fact of the prosecution case is made out in the complaint is that on 10.02.2017, the applicants herein have entered into the premises where respondent No.2 – original complainant was staying with his wife and taken away their grandson with them after threatening them.

4.1 It is submitted by the applicants that applicant No.1’s daughter got married with son of respondent No.2 and out of such wedlock, they had a minor child namely Trijal, who is at present aged about four years. That since there was marital discord between the applicant No.1’s daughter and respondent No.2’s son, the daughter had filed proceedings against respondent No.2’s son. That subsequently, a settlement was arrived at between both the sides and pursuant thereto a quashing petition being Criminal Misc. Application No.3170 of 2017 came to be filed by son of respondent No.2 and the same was allowed by this Court vide order dated 06.02.2017 whereby the applicant No.1’s daughter was supposed to join the matrimonial house on 10.02.2017. That with the intervention of this Court, the applicants were hopeful of reunion between the applicant No.1’s daughter and her husband. It is further submitted that to the shock and surprise of the applicants herein, the applicants were ill-treated, insulted and threatened with dire consequences if the daughter of applicant No.1 would continue to live at in-laws’ place. It is also submitted that unable to bear such ill-treatment in spite of directions of this Court to join the matrimonial house, the applicant No.1’s daughter left the house with son Trijal and rest of the applicants left the premises. It is further submitted that after the said incident, applicant No.1’s daughter was missing and, therefore, on the same day, applicants went to the concerned police station to have the complaint registered against respondent No.2 herein and other family members as well as to file a missing person’s about his daughter. It is submitted that since the daughter of applicant No.1 was not traceable in spite of various efforts, a janvajog entry came to be given to the Police Inspector, Kalol.

4.2 It is submitted by the applicants that no complaint was registered pursuant to the complaint given by the applicants on 10.02.2017. They approached higher authority by making various representations and even they filed application under the Right to Information Act seeking CCTV footage of the camera installed in Vejalpur Police Station sensing mala fide actions on the part of the police authority in not registering the complaint given by the applicants. It is also submitted that thereafter, the applicant No.1 filed petition being Special Criminal Application No.1939 of 2017 seeking direction to have the complaint dated 10.02.2017 registered and investigated. It is submitted that this Court had been pleased to direct the police authority to have the complaint dated 10.02.2017 registered as FIR and pursuant to the same, the complaint came to be registered on 25.03.2017.

4.3 It is submitted by the applicants that the allegations made in the impugned complaint even if they are taken on its face value and accepted in its entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out any case against them. It is also submitted that the allegations are absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach to a co