Disposed

Smt. Prabha Bind and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC27 Sept 2021CRLP/2546/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of a criminal writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR for kidnapping and abduction involving an alleged minor victim. The court observed the lack of age proof and quashed coercive action pending a Magistrate-directed enquiry to ascertain the girl's age and voluntariness.

What did the court decide?

No coercive action against petitioners till production of girl before Magistrate for age verification enquiry.

Smt. Prabha Bind and Another Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2546 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Smt. Prabha Bind And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akhilesh Kumar Tiwari,Surendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Mrs. Sadhna Rani (Thakur),J.

¶5

The copy of the short counter affidavit placed before the Court be filed before the Office, which shall upload the same.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents.

¶7

By means of the present petition, the petitioners are seeking quashing of the first information report dated 21.09.2020 registered as Case Crime No.0203 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C., P.S.- Sikarara, District- Jaunpur.

¶8

The first information report, quashing of which has been sought before us has been lodged under Sections 363 and 366 I.P.C. with the categorical assertion that the victim/ girl is minor. There is no authentic proof of age of the victim/ girl.

¶9

The copy of Adhar Card placed before the Court cannot be taken as a proof of age of the victim/ girl.

¶10

In the affidavit of the Investigating Officer filed in May, 2021, it is stated that some enquiry had been made with regard to the age of the victim girl. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the statement of the victim/ girl has been recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

¶11

Be that as it may, as there is no age proof of the victim/ girl, it would be expedient in the interest of justice that an enquiry to determine the age of the victim/ girl is made by the competent Magistrate.

¶12

The petitioner no.2 (boy) is directed to produce the victim girl (petitioner no.1) before the court of Magistrate concerned on or before 5th October, 2021. Upon her production, the Magistrate concerned shall proceed to record the statement of petitioner no.1 to ascertain whether any force has been used on her or she

¶13

has been voluntarily in the company of the petitioner no.2. In case, the petitioner no.1 deposes before the Magistrate concerned that force has been used on her, the Magistrate concerned shall proceed to pass appropriate orders immediately in respect of the custody/protection of the girl.

¶14

However, in case, the girl deposes that she has been voluntarily in the company of the petitioner no.2 or any other person and that no force has been used on her, learned Magistrate shall call upon the Investigating Officer of the case and fix a date for appearance of the informant or the parents or natural guardian of the girl for the purpose of determining the age of the girl.

¶15

On the date so fixed or within such reasonable time as may be required, the learned Magistrate shall proceed to determine the age of the girl as per law, keeping in mind the provisions that are applicable for determination of the age of a girl and may, if necessary, direct for ossification test/medical examination of the girl from a District Government Hospital.

¶16

If the girl is found to be a minor, the learned Magistrate shall proceed to pass appropriate orders in respect of custody of the girl, as per law. However, in case, the girl is found to be an adult, he shall proceed to record the statement of the girl under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

¶17

On the basis of the statement of the girl and the age of the girl as determined above, the police shall submit report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.

¶18

The aforesaid exercise shall be completed preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of production of the girl before the Magistrate concerned.

¶19

Till 5th October, 2021 or the date on which the girl is produced before the Magistrate concerned, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners in the above case.

¶20

Thereafter, if the girl is produced before the Magistrate concerned as directed above, the accused shall be dealt with as per the statement of the girl. Though, in the event the girl is found to be minor, the police would be free to take the investigation to its logical conclusion and may effect arrest of the accused.

¶21

It is further clarified that if the girl is not produced by the date fixed as above, there shall be no protection and the investigating agency shall be free to take all steps that may be

¶22

necessary to bring the investigation to its logical conclusion.

¶23

With the aforesaid observations/directions, the petition is disposed of .

¶24

Order Date :- 27.9.2021 Radhika

¶25

Digitally signed by SUNITA Digitally signed by Sadhna Rani AGARWAL Thakur Date: 2021.09.29 15:26:34 IST Date: 2021.09.29 15:28:14 IST Reason: Document Owner Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Allahabad

Smt. Prabha Bind and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Prabha Bind and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijay Singh and Another Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Rishi Kumar Goyal Vs State of Up and Others

Lala @ Rama Shankar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Jabir and another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Pitambar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Harish Yadav Vs State of U.P.