Allahabad High Court
Arjun And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 22 May, 2023
Bench: Vivek Kumar Birla, Surendra Singh-I
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:112623-DB
Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 6943 of 2023
Petitioner :- Arjun And 4 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ramesh Kumar Ojha,Vishnu Kant Ojha
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Shailendra Kumar Verma
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.
Hon'ble Surendra Singh-I,J.
1. Heard Sri Ramesh Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. This writ petition has been filed praying to quash the first information report dated 21.03.2023, registered in Case Crime No.204 of 2023, under Sections 363, 328 IPC, P.S. Sikandra, District Agra and not arrest the petitioners pursuant to the said FIR.
3. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that as per Aadhar Card, date of birth of the petitioner no.1-Arjun is 15.12.1998 and date of birth of the petitioner no.2-Tannu is 01.01.2004, therefore both the petitioners are major. By drawing attention to Annexure-2 to the writ petition, which is a certificate of marriage, it is submitted that both the petitioners have married to each other out of their own free will, as such no offence as alleged is made out.
4. Per contra, learned AGA disputes the aforesaid facts and submitted that as per first information report the victim is aged about 16 years.
5. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Suhani vs. State of U.P. reported in 2018 0 Supreme (SC) 1430 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.2-Tannu 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 the 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.1, 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 :- 22.5.2023
Nitendra
