RUKHASAR KHATOON Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) A large number of cases, with similar prayer are being listed these days, with a prayer for issuance of writ of habeas corpus and for a direction to respondents to release them from illegal confinement. Applications are being filed by those girls, who on account of solemnizing their marriage as per their own choice but against the wishes of their parents, are being sent to remand home, on their production before the CJM or Magistrate, in connection with police or complaint case filed by their parents/family members alleging their kidnapping by accused person, who in fact are their husband and in-laws. The Magistrate, ignoring the statement of such girls, recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as well as the report of the Medical Board are passing orders of remand and they are being sent to Remand Home.

(3.) In this case also the petitioner with similar facts has prayed for a direction to release her. She solemnized her marriage with respondent no. 4 at Delhi. However, coming to know that a complaint case has been instituted by her family members against the respondent no. 4, her husband and other family members, she alongwith her husband came to Muzaffarpur and voluntarily surrendered before the Superintendent of Police, Muzaffarpur. The Superintendent of Police, Muzaffarpur, without any reason directed the petitioner and her husband to approach the Officer Incharge of Ahiyapur Police Station. The Officer Incharge of Ahiyapur Police Station, took her husband into custody, even though till that date no police case had been instituted against her husband for kidnapping of the petitioner, on the basis of complaint case, subsequently on 31.7.10, the police case vide Ahiyapur Police Case No. 271 of 2010 was instituted for kidnapping of the petitioner by respondent no. 4 and others. The petitioner, thereafter was produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, who after recording her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. also got her age assessed by the Medical Board. As per medical report, she was about 16 years of age. The Court assessed her age to be 17 years of age. However, father of the petitioner produced a school leaving certificate in which her date of birth was recorded as 9.10.1997, The Court concerned, even though, has discussed in the light of Supreme Court's judgment, in Jaymala V/s. Home Commissioner, State of Jammu and Kashmir* that while assessing the age of a girl in such circumstances, two more years should be added in her actual age but passed order, completely against the direction of the Supreme Court. The CJM, Muzaffarpur, remanded the petitioner to the Remand Home at Gayghat, Patna City, treating her to be mother (sic minor ?) and since then she has been detained at Remand Home.