- (1.) This Habeas Corpus Writ Petition has been filed by Smt. Indra alias Suhani daughter of Santosh Kumar Awasthi through Shiv Kant alias Shubham with whom she claims to have married with her free will, assailing the validity of her detention in the Nari Niketan where presently she has been kept vide order dated 16.4.2013 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate. On 2.5.2013 this Court had directed the respondent No. 5 to produce the petitioner in the Court. In compliance of the order the petitioner was produced in the Court and a counter-affidavit on behalf of respondent No. 6 was also filed. Today a rejoinder-affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the petitioner who herself has again been produced before us. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondent and learned AGA. It seems that there was an FIR lodged against one Shubham alongwith some other co-accused under Sections 363, 366-A, 504 and 506 IPC at P.S. Kotwali Lalitpur under case crime No. 2265 of 2012. According to which petitioner Indra alias Suhani studying in Class XII was enticed away on 27.11.2012 by Shubham with the aid and assistance of other co-accused. It also transpires that a criminal misc. writ petition No. 5015/13 was filed on behalf of Smt. Indra alias Suhani, Shiv Kant alias Shubham, Smt. Rama and Smt. Maya with the prayer to quash the aforesaid FIR. A division bench of this Court was pleased to pass a detailed order on 22.3.2013 in which several directions were given to the concerned I.O. and C.J.M. This order has been annexed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition. The relevant portion of the order is quoted herein below: .............Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the kidnapped girl Km. Indra @ Suhani is major and she has performed the marriage with petitioner No. 2 Shivkant @ Shubham and she is living in his company as his house wife with her free will and consent, it is directed that in case the alleged kidnapped girl Km. Indra @ Suhani appears/produced before the Court of learned C.J.M., Lalitpur within 20 days from today and moves an application for her medical examination for recording her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., the learned magistrate concerned shall fix a date for the same purpose and shall summon the first informant and officer in charge of the police station concerned for the purpose of her identification and to record her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. after her identification by them, she shall be medically examined by the C.M.O. concerned to determine her age, then she shall be interrogated by the I.O. and her statement shall be recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., if thereafter, the I.O. moves an application before learned magistrate concerned to record her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., her statement shall be recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. if she is found major and does not support the F.I.R. version, the petitioners shall not be arrested till submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. but the petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation. In case she appears to be minor or she is major and supports the prosecution version, the I.O. shall be free to arrest the accused person. It is further directed that issue of custody of the alleged kidnapped girl shall be decided by the C.J.M. concerned in accordance with law. It is further directed that in case the petitioners approach the S.P. Lalitpur to provide them protection for the purpose of appearing before the Court concerned to record the statement of the kidnapped girl Km. Indra @ Suhani under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and for medical examination, the same shall be provided.
(2.) It further transpires that in compliance of the above mentioned order, the petitioner was examined under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and was also put to medical examination for the determination of her age. The statement of the petitioner under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has been annexed as Annexure-5 to the writ petition.
(3.) The perusal of the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Seems to be a brazen statement of the petitioner wherein she has narrated about her love affair with Shubham alias Shiv Kant and the entire details as to how her father did not countenance to this relationship with the boy. She also stated before the Chief Judicial Magistrate that she herself had called the boy on the Station and not only coaxed and persuaded the boy to take her away alongwith him but had also threatened her paramour that in case he will not take her alongwith him she will commit suicide. The petitioner has also annexed certain photographs showing the garlanding of each other (between the petitioner and her alleged husband Shubham), in order to prove her marriage.;