Court directed age determination test for the minor respondent under Cr.P.C. Before report, petitioners not to be arrested unless illegal relations found. Petition dismissed on condition.
Directed age determination test. Until final report, no arrest of petitioners if age test shows majority and favours them. If not, arrest permissible.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:206110-DB
Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 16821 of 2023
Petitioner :- Shivani Devi And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.
1 . Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri G.P. Singh, 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 22.9.2023, registered in Case Crime No. 0479 of 2023, under Sections 363, 366 IPC, Police Station - Bevar, District - Mainpuri and not arrest the petitioners pursuant to the said FIR.
3 . The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that both the petitioners are major. The date of birth of petitioner no. 1 -Shivani Devi, as per Adhar Card is 1.1.2005 and date of birth of petitioner no. 2 - Raj Kishor as per Aadhar Card is 1.1.1995 and as such both are married and they married to each other out of their own free will, as such no offence under Section 363 I.P.C. is made out.
4 . Per contra, learned AGA submits that the Aadhar Card is not an authentic proof and on the basis of Aadhar Card of the petitioner nos. 1 and 2, their age can not be relied.
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 judgement dated 18.7.2023 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1898 of 2023 (P. Yuvaprakash vs. State Rep. by Inspector of Police) 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-Smt. Anjali 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 on or before 11.12.2023 or 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. 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 :- 28.10.2023 S.K.S.
Digitally signed by :- SUNIL KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners should be arrested pending age determination of the girl.
Whether the Aadhar Card is sufficient proof of age in this case.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Suhani vs. State of U.P.Referred¶10
Suhani vs. State of U.P. 2018 0 Supreme (SC) 1430
P. Yuvaprakash vs. State Rep. by Inspector of PoliceReferred¶10
Criminal Appeal No. 1898 of 2023 (P. Yuvaprakash vs. State Rep. by Inspector of Police)
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Shivani Devi
Raj Kishor
Shivani Devi
State Of U.P.
Vivek Kumar Birla
Vinod Diwakar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
