Inter-Caste Marriage : Supreme Court Quashes Non-Bailable Warrants Issued Against Dalit Man In A Case Alleging Abduction Of Wife

Coming to the aid of the man, a Division Bench comprising of Justices Surya Kant and Abhay S Oka observed,

"In our considered view, subject to the petitioner joining and fully co-operating with the on-going investigation in the F.I.R....it is not a case where non-bailable warrants ought to have been issued against the petitioner."

While granting pre-arrest bail, the bench also directed him to fully co-operate with investigation in the cases registered against him at Police Station-Ontari, District Garwa, Jharkhand.

The Court was considering an SLP challenging the judgment of the High Court of Jharkhand dated March 22, which dismissed the petitioner's plea against non-bailable warrants against him in connection with a case under Section 366 (Kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel her marriage, etc) of the Indian Penal Code and others.

In April, the Apex Court had granted interim relief to the petitioner by protecting him from arrest until further orders.

In his plea, the petitioner stated that a First Information Report under multiple sections was filed against the petitioner, his father and friends, after he married his childhood school friend, belonging to the Brahmin community.

The petitioner contended that the case against him and others was registered after he moved High Court of Himachal Pradesh, filing a petition of Habeas Corpus asking his wife's family members to produce her. He moved the High Court alleging that his wife was forcibly taken away from their home in HP at midnight, by 6 persons who were dressed in 'police uniform', after their wedding. Later, the HP High Court was informed that a criminal case has been registered against the husband in Jharkhand alleging abduction.

The case was registered against him and others after the High Court issued notice in the habes corpus petition, he claimed.

"The petitioner is grossly aggrieved due to the arbitrary and unconstitutional actions of the respondent and in laws of the wife of the petitioner who have grossly misused the entire system to their advantage depriving him the right to equal protection of laws, life and personal liberty as guaranteed under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India", the petition filed in the Supreme Court stated

The petitioner also stated that he along with his family are under great threat and fear after that incident which happened, after their wedding.

The petition was filed through Advocate on record, Utkarsh Singh, who argued on the behalf of the petitioner as well.