MNNI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. This habeas corpus writ petition has been filed on behalf of K.M. Munni by her father Latif with a prayer:

(2.) The facts in brief of this case are that FIR of this case has been lodged by Intzaar son of Latif at police station, Nangal, District Saharanpur on 10.9.2012 at 2.30 P.M. in case crime No. 168 of 2012 under sections 363 and 366 IPC alleging therein that his daughter K.M. Munni aged about 16 years has been kidnapped by one Sumit. During investigation the corpus was recovered, she was medically examined, her statement under section 161/164 Cr.P.C. was recorded. During investigation the I.O. collected the birth certificate of the corpus K.M. Munni in the shape of High School certificate in which her date of birth was mentioned 8.6.1996. The corpus was minor at the time of the incident which occurred on 9.9.2012. On an application moved by the I.O. the statement of the corpus was recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she stated that she herself had gone in the company of Sumit, she refused to go with her parents, she expressed her desire to go with the accused Sumit who was not present in the Court, thereafter she stated that she may be sent to nari niketan. An another application was moved by Intazar son of Latif in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Deoband for releasing the corpus in his favour stating therein that the corpus was minor, she was kidnapped on 9.9.2012, thereafter she has been recovered by the police, she may be given his custody. The third application was moved by Kailash Chandra, the father of the accused Sumit mentioning therein that his son Sumit has made accused, the corpus has been medically examined. According to the medical examination report she was aged about 18 years. The statement of the corpus has been recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she stated that she wanted to go with Sumit, therefore, she may be given in the custody of Sumit's father. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Deoband decided the above mentioned three applications after perusing the case diary, medical examination report, High School Marksheet of the corpus and the statement of the corpus recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C., after considering the same learned Judicial Magistrate, Deoband came to the conclusion that the corpus was minor. According to the High School Marksheet her date of birth was 8.6.1996. On account of her refusal to go with her parents' house and corpus desired to go nari niketan, she was sent to nari niketan vide order dated 15.9.2012. After aggrieved from the order dated 15.9.2012 passed by learned Addl. Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)/Judicial Magistrate, Deoband, District Saharanpur the present writ petitioner has been preferred.

(3.) After filing this writ petition we summoned the corpus from nari niketan, Meerut, she was produced before this Court on 10.1.2013. On query made by the Court she stated that in school record her date of birth was mentioned as 8.6.1996, though she has not performed the marriage with Sumit but she wanted to go with Sumit, Sumit had passed the Intermediate examination. The first informant of this case namely Intazar was also present before this Court. In his presence the corpus stated that she would like to live in nari niketan but not in her parents house whereas her brother Intazar stated that he was having only one sister, he wanted to have the custody of the corpus. He also stated that the marriage of the corpus was not performed with Sumit, but corpus has not shown any reason in respect of the danger to her life at her parents' house.