Smt Khushi And Another vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 22582 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:168076-DB
 
Court No. - 45
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 12466 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Smt Khushi And Another
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mukesh Chandra Gupta,Shubham Prakash Gupta
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Piyush Dubey
 

 
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.

Hon'ble Surendra Singh-I,J.

1. Heard Sri Shubham Prakash Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Piyush Dubey, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Vivek Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents and perused the record.

2. This writ petition has been filed praying to quash the FIR dated 14.07.2023, registered as Case Crime No.0241 of 2023, under Section 363, 366 IPC, Police Station Malpura, District Agra and not arrest the petitioners pursuant to the said FIR.

3. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that both the petitioners are major and have also married and their marriage has also been registered on 24.07.2023. Submission therefore is that no offence as alleged has been made out.

4. Learned counsel for the informant submits that although the Aadhar Card is of the same number but there are two different date of birth. However, all the parties agree that there is no authentic educational certificate which may be conclusive proof of age. At this stage, learned AGA submits that there is no authentic proof of age.

5. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Suhani vs. State of U.P. reported in 2018 0 Supreme (SC) 1430 and P. Yuvaprakash vs. State Rep. By Inspector of Police, decided on 18.07.2023 in Criminal Appeal No.1898 of 2023 and submits that in all such matters Hon'ble Apex Court has directed for age determination test of the girl.

6. In view thereof, we direct that the petitioner no.1-Khushi be produced before the Magistrate concerned, for recording her statement under section 164(1) and (5) of Cr.P.C. and thereafter, she shall be brought before the Chief Medical Officer concerned by the I.O. of the case who shall constitute a panel of three doctors, for her age determination test (ossification test). Both these exercises must conclude within six weeks from today.

7. It is incumbent upon the petitioners to provide all necessary assistance to the Investigation Officer during investigation, however, the petitioners shall not be arrested during this period.

8. The arrest of the petitioners shall be subject to 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the girl and her age.

9. In the event, if it is found that she had attained the age of majority and her 164 Cr.P.C. statement favours the petitioner no.2, then the petitioners shall not be arrested till the submission of report by the police under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. OTHERWISE, the procedure of law would follow against the petitioners and the protection given to the petitioners would automatically stands vacated.

10. With this observation, the writ petition stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 21.8.2023

Pratima