IMPORTANT POINT
The court allowed the compounding application, quashing proceedings under IPC sections 363 and 366(A) to protect the family life of the married couple and their child, emphasizing the validity of their marriage post-conversion.

JUDGMENT :

(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)

1. The instant C482 Application has been moved along with the Compounding Application (IA/2/2022) supported with the affidavits of applicant and respondent No. 3. The applicant and respondent No. 3 are present in Court and are identified by their respective counsels through their Aadhaar Cards, the xerox copy of which is placed on record.

2. The applicant was implicated pursuant to the First Information Report lodged by respondent No. 2 dated 28.08.2019 at P.S. Bainoli, Tehsil Karnprayag, District Chamoli registered as Case Crime No. 2 of 2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366(A) of IPC wherein after investigation the chargesheet was filed and the present applicant has been summoned.

3. Now, the compounding application has been moved with this contention that the present applicant who is Hindu by religion and respondent No. 3 i.e. the victim who is Muslim by religion, already married with each other on 19.10.2022 and from this marriage one child is also born on 06.08.2023. It is submitted that both of them married in Delhi and in respect of which a certificate of marriage dated 19.10.2022 is also enclosed as Annexure-5, issued by a Trust, namely, “Pandav Kalin Neeli Chhatri Mandir, Prachin Neeli Chhatri Sanatan Dharam Vivah Padti Trust” (in short “the Trust”), 2067, Yamuna Bazar, Delhi-110006.

4. It is also submitted that respondent No. 3 the victim, who is now the wife of present applicant also got certificate of conversion from Muslim to Hindu and the said certificate was also issued by the Trust on 19.10.2022, the date when the applicant married with respondent No. 3.

5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the parties that now both of them are residing at Karnprayag and by profession the applicant is driver and he is living happily with his wife/respondent No. 3 along with minor child.

6. It is also submitted that respondent No. 2 the father of the victim is not agreeable for this marriage and that is the reason the compounding application is not supported with his affidavit. Both the counsels for the parties submitted that the applicant and respondent No. 3 were major on the date when they married with each other.

7. Apart from this, it is also submitted that though their marriage is registered on 19.10.2022 which is evident from the certificate of marriage issued by the Trust, but since they are now residing in the territory of State of Uttarakhand, they have also applied for registration of their marriage before the Registrar; however, their marriage has yet not been registered because as per State law, a fresh certificate of conversion of religion is required.

8. Mr. Yogesh Pacholia, learned counsel for the applicant placed before this Court the copy of letter dated 22.08.2024 which was submitted by the applicant to the Registrar for registration of their marriage wherein the reference of the date of marriage and the conversion of religion has also been given.

9. Mr. B.C. Joshi, learned AGA for the State also fairly submits that the certificate with regard to conversion has also been enclosed along with this Application but the Registrar have not registered their marriage as there is no certificate of District Magistrate about conversion as per the State law. Learned State counsel submits that though after thorough investigation and after collecting credible evidence the chargesheet has been filed, but he fairly submits that since the applicant married with respondent No. 3 on 19.10.2022 after the conversion of religion of respondent No. 3 and from this marriage one child was born, therefore, there is no useful purpose to continue with this proceedings otherwise it will spoil the married life of the applicant and respondent No. 3 as well as the future of minor child.

10. Both the applicant and respondent No. 3 are present in Court along with minor child and this Court also interacted with each of them, particularly on interaction with respondent No. 3, she submits