A disturbing case of alleged abduction and assault has emerged from Hisar, Haryana, where a married woman living in a live-in relationship was reportedly taken away by her husband and his associates. The incident, which has sent shockwaves through the local community, also involved a violent assault on the woman's partner, followed by threats of dire consequences.
Police Action and FIR Details
According to official reports, the Narnaund police have taken swift action by registering a First Information Report (FIR) based on a complaint filed by Monu, a resident of Gurana village in Hansi district. The accused individuals named in the FIR include Nripendra, Nitesh, and Pradeep from Dhigawan village in Bhiwani district, along with Sonu and another Pradeep from Gurana village. Additionally, four to five unidentified persons have been implicated in the case.
The charges levied against them are severe and comprehensive, encompassing multiple sections of the newly enacted Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita. Specifically, the FIR invokes Sections 115(2) for causing hurt, 190 for common object of unlawful assembly, 191(2) for rioting, 140(3) for abduction, 324(4) for mischief, and 351(3) for criminal intimidation. This legal framework underscores the gravity of the alleged offenses, highlighting the authorities' commitment to addressing such crimes under the updated penal code.
Background of the Live-In Relationship
In his detailed complaint to the police, Monu revealed that he works as a welder and had been in a live-in relationship with Shashi, who is married to Nripendra, since January 16. The couple sought refuge in a safe house in Hisar starting January 19, indicating a deliberate attempt to distance themselves from potential conflicts or threats.
During this period, Nripendra reportedly filed a missing person report for Shashi at the Loharu police station. However, when police later recorded Shashi's statement, she allegedly refused to return to her husband, suggesting a complex personal situation and possible coercion or dissatisfaction in her marital life. This refusal adds a layer of complexity to the case, as it implies Shashi's voluntary participation in the live-in arrangement, which is now at the center of the alleged abduction.
The Alleged Abduction and Assault
The situation escalated dramatically on February 2, around 3:30 AM, when Monu had returned to his village, Gurana. According to the complaint, Nripendra arrived at the location accompanied by Nitesh, Pradeep, Sonu, and another Pradeep. In a brazen act, the accused allegedly scaled the boundary wall to gain entry into the house.
Once inside, they are said to have physically assaulted Monu, causing him harm, before forcibly putting Shashi into a car. A source close to the investigation described the scene as chaotic and violent, with the perpetrators acting with apparent impunity. Furthermore, the complainant alleged that the accused threatened to kill Monu if he ever attempted to contact or meet Shashi in the future, adding a chilling dimension of intimidation to the already severe physical violence.
Ongoing Investigation and Police Efforts
In response to these serious allegations, the Narnaund police have launched a thorough investigation. Authorities have confirmed that raids are currently being conducted to trace and apprehend the accused individuals. The investigation is actively in progress, with police officials working diligently to gather evidence, interview witnesses, and piece together the sequence of events.
The use of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita in this FIR marks a significant aspect of the case, as it reflects the legal system's adaptation to contemporary issues like live-in relationships and domestic disputes. This incident not only highlights personal and familial conflicts but also raises broader questions about safety, consent, and legal protections for individuals in non-traditional relationships.
As the investigation unfolds, the community and authorities alike are closely monitoring developments, hoping for a swift resolution that ensures justice for all parties involved. The case serves as a stark reminder of the challenges faced by those in live-in arrangements and the importance of robust legal mechanisms to address such crises.
