Rukhsar Khatoon and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Rukhsar Khatoon and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim, conditional non-arrest protection for both petitioners pending completion of the ossification age-determination test and the petitioner no.1's statement under s.183 B.N.S.S. (both to conclude on or before 19.6.2025 as printed / within six weeks); petitioners to cooperate with the Investigation Officer; if majority is established and the s.183 B.N.S.S. statement favours petitioner no. 2, protection continues till the police report under s.193 B.N.S.S.; failing that, the protection automatically stands vacated and ordinary legal procedure follows.

Issue for consideration

Whether any offence as alleged in the FIR dated 13.4.2025 (Case Crime No. 0077 of 2025, Section 137(2) BNS) is maintainable, petitioners contending that petitioner no. 1 is a major girl and the case is an abuse of the process of law. +2 more

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner no.1-Rukhsar Khatoon is to be produced before the Magistrate concerned for recording her statement under section 183 B.N.S.S.

Key takeaways

Thereafter she shall be brought before the Chief Medical Officer concerned by the I.O., who shall constitute a panel of three doctors for her age determination test (ossification test).ratio¶11
Both exercises (s.183 BNSS statement and ossification test) must conclude on or before 19.62025 (as printed in the judgment) or within six weeks from the date of the order.ratio¶11
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.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT | Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 9330 of 2025 (Rukhsar Khatoon & Anr. v. State of U.P. & 3 Ors.) | Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:75362-DB | Order dated 9.5.2025 | Bench: Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla, J. and Hon'ble Jitendra Kumar Sinha, J. | Petition sought quashing of FIR dated 13.4.2025, Case Crime No. 0077 of 2025, under Section 137(2) BNS, P.S. Khampur, District Deoria, and non-arrest of petitioners, on the plea that petitioner no. 1 is a major (Birth Certificate DOB 7.2.2005; petitioner no. 2's Aadhaar DOB shown as 15.4.2024) and the couple married of their own will, while the AGA reported petitioner no. 1's educational-record DOB as 26.7.2008 (student of Class X). Counsel relied on Suhani v. State of U.P., 2018 0 Supreme (SC) 1430, and the judgement dated 18.7.2023 in Criminal Appeal No. 1898 of 2023 (P. Yuvaprakash), citing the Apex Court's practice of directing age-determination tests. Court DISPOSED OF the petition with directions: (i) produce petitioner no. 1 before the Magistrate for recording her statement under s.183 B.N.S.S.; (ii) then bring her before the CMO through the I.O., who shall constitute a panel of three doctors for the ossification (age-determination) test; (iii) both exercises to conclude on or before 19.6.2025 (printed '19.62025') or within six weeks; (iv) petitioners not to be arrested during this period and must assist the I.O.; (v) arrest subject to the girl's s.183 B.N.S.S. statement and her age; (vi) if majority is found and the statement favours petitioner no. 2, no arrest till the police report under s.193 B.N.S.S., OTHERWISE legal procedure follows and the protection automatically stands vacated. Interim/conditional protection; merits of quashing left to subsequent course.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:75362-DB

Court No. - 43

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9330 of 2025

Petitioner :- Rukhsar Khatoon And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Samsher Aalam Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.

1 . Heard Sri Samsher Aalam, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Rahul Asthana, 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 13.4.2025, registered in Case Crime No. 0077 of 2025, under Section 137(2) BNS, P.S. Khampur, District Deoria and not arrest the petitioners pursuant to the said FIR.

3 . Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that no offence as alleged is made out as the petitioner no. 1 is a major girl and the entire criminal case lodged by the informant is nothing but an abuse of the process of the law. It is further submitted that as per Birth Certificate (at page 28), date of birth of petitioner no. 1 is 7.2.2005 and as per Aadhar Card the date of birth of petitioner no. 2 is 15.4.2024 and as such, the petitioners no. 1 and 2 are major on the date of incident and they have married on their sweet will and no offence has been committed.

4 . Per contra, learned AGA submits that as per his instructions the petitioner no. 1 was a student of Class X and in her educational record her date of birth is 26.7.2008.

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 Polic) 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-Rukhsar Khatoon be produced before the Magistrate concerned, for recording her statement under section 183 B.N.S.S. 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 19.62025 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 183 B.N.S.S. 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 183 B.N.S.S. statement favours the petitioner no. 2, then the petitioners shall not be arrested till the submission of report by the police under section 193 B.N.S.S.. 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 :- 9.5.2025 Abhishek

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad