MANOJA DEVI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Abhay Raj Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and Sri Y.D.Misra, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 5 Rajeshwar.

(2.) This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed on behalf of Manoja Devi by Santosh Kumar Singh, petitioner no. 2 with the following prayers :-

(3.) The facts of this case are that the FIR has been lodged by Rajeshwar, the father of the corpus Manoja Devi, on 16.6.2012 at 9.15 a.m. at P.S. Dataganj in case crime no. 286 of 2012 under sections 363,366 I.P.C. against the petitioner no. 2 Santosh, Narsingh and Jai Singh with the allegation that Narsingh was purchasing the milk from the first informant Rajeshwar for the last two years, whenever he was not coming to take the milk, his brother Santosh and Jai Singh used to come to his house for taking the milk, about one month prior to lodging of the F.I.R. Santosh and his brother came to his house in night and enticed the corpus Manoja Devi and taken away her. The corpus Manoja Devi was recovered, she was medically examined on 18.6.2012. According to the medical examination report no marks of injury was seen on her person, her hymen was torn and old healed. According to the x-ray report her age was about 18 years. According to the x-ray report epiphysis of wrist, elbow joint and knee were found fused, but the epiphysis of clavicle were not fused. After the recovery of corpus, she was handed over to her father Rajeshwar Singh by the I.O. on 20.6.2012. Thereafter the statement of the corpus Manoja Devi was recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. on 7.7.2012 in the court of Additional Sessions Judge (Junior Division)/ Judicial Magistrate, Budaun in which she stated that she was aged about 20 years, she had gone to the house of her sister Santosh with her free will, she was not enticed by any person and she has not gone in the company of Narsingh, Santosh and Jai Singh. She had gone to the house of her sister by telling her parents, she was not enticed and kidnapped by any person. After completing the investigation the charge sheet has been submitted against petitioner no. 2 and others under sections 363,366 I.P.C. According to the police papers the corpus was handed over to her father Rajeshwar on 20.6.2012 but according to petitioner no. 2 she was not handed over to her parents, she remained in police custody, thereafter, an application was moved by the mother of the corpus for releasing the corpus in her custody, in support of that application school certificate has also been filed showing therein that the corpus was minor but the corpus was sent to Nari Niketan on 4.8.2012 because she had refused to go in the company of her parents, she had expressed the apprehension about her life. The corpus was again summoned on 9.7.2012 by that time two applications one by her father and one by Smt. Ram Piyari were moved for releasing the corpus in their favour. Smt. Ram Piyari, is the mother of the accused Santosh Singh, both the applications have been decided on 9.7.2012. According to the school certificate her date of birth is 3.7.1995 but she had refused to go to the house of her parents. She again expressed danger to her life. In such circumstances, she was sent to Nari Niketan. The order dated 4.8.2012 and 9.7.2012 are under challenged.