Disposed

Mantasa and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC1 Sept 2021CRLP/5791/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a petition seeking quashing of an FIR under IPC and POCSO regarding intercourse with a girl, the court noted lack of age proof. It directed the boy to produce the girl before a Magistrate to ascertain voluntariness and conduct an age determination test. Pending this exercise, no coercive action is against petitioners.

What did the court decide?

No coercive action to be taken against petitioners pending production of girl and determination of age by Magistrate within four weeks.

Mantasa and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5791 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Mantasa And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Javed Habib Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

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

¶5

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

¶6

By means of the present petition, the petitioners are seeking quashing of the first information report dated 9.11.2017 registered as Case Crime No.0387 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S.- Amaria, District- Pilibhit.

¶7

The copy of Adhar Card of petitioner nos.1 appended with the writ petition can not be accepted as proof of age of the victim / girl.

¶8

There is no age proof of victim/ girl (petitioner no.1- Smt. Mantasa).

¶9

However, in absence of proof of age, it is directed that the petitioner no.2 (boy) shall produce the petitioner no.1 (girl) before the court of Magistrate concerned on or before 13th September, 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 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.

¶10

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. 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

¶11

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.

¶12

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.

¶13

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.

¶14

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.

¶15

Till 13 th September, 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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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 necessary to bring the investigation to its logical conclusion.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 1.9.2021 Gss

Mantasa and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mantasa and 2 Others 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yogesh Kumar Vs the Court of Special Judge and 3 Others

Smt. Ruby and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bablu Shah Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

prof. akhilesh kumar Vs State of U.P. and Others

Mohammad Yusuf Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Salman Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others