RINKU Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Pawan Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Patanjali Mishra, learned AGA appearing for the State and perused the record.

(2.) The contention of the counsel for the petitioners is that the FIR has been lodged by the mother of the girl namely Meetu @ Neetu; that Meetu @ Neetu/girl is the petitioner no.2 and the petitioner no.1 happens to be her husband namely Rinku, who is an accused as per the FIR; that the date of birth of the alleged victim as per the Admit Card of High School Examination-2018, copy of which has been annexed on page no.22 of the writ petition; that there is a joint affidavit of the boy and the girl i.e. petitioner nos.1 and 2, in support of the present writ petition; that much reliance has been placed on the Marriage of Notary Affidavit alongwith Photographs, which have been annexed as annexure no.4 of the writ petition.

(3.) The Court has been further informed that the victim/petitioner no.2 is present before the Court and thus the Court proceed to examine the girl by way of an abundant caution for knowing the validity of the fact as mentioned in the writ petition and also for the purposes of verifying as to whether she is a signatory to the said affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, as a deponent or not, and also to verifying her age, with the consent of counsel for the parties.