J.J. Munir, J. - (1.) This revision calls into question the validity of an order dated 07.02.2018 passed by Ms. Kavita Mishra, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra in Case Crime no.439 of 2017, State vs. Navin and others, under Sections 363, 352, 504, 506, 120B IPC and Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act, Police Station Bah, District Agra, whereby acting on the directions of this Court issued in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition no.28295 of 2017, Smt. Kajal Goshwami vs. State of U.P. and 5 others, decided on 10.01.2018, the learned Magistrate has proceeded to decide the issue of custody of Kajal, who is hereinafter referred to as the 'prosecutrix'. By the said order dated 07.02.2018 that is hereinafter referred to as the 'impugned order', the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has ordered that the prosecutrix shall remain in the safe custody of Nari Niketan, Mathura, until she attains the age of majority.
(2.) This revision was initially filed by Navin Goswami alone, but later on, by permission of this Court, the prosecutrix also joined her as revisionist no.2. Opposite party no.3 to this revision is Sanjeev Kumar Goswami, who is the father of the prosecutrix and the second revisionist. He is the informant of the case that was registered as Case Crime no.439 2017 in connection whereof the impugned order has been passed.
(3.) The facts giving rise to the case crime under reference and the impugned order lie in a narrow compass. Revisionists no.1 & 2 claiming themselves to be of the age of majority and competent to marry under the law, married according to the Hindu rites at the Arya Samaj Mandir, Greater Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar on 07.12.2017 in the presence of two witnesses, Mukesh and Jakir Ali. The Secretary of the Arya Samaj Mandir issued a certificate of marriage to the revisionists on 07.12.2017. Revisionist no.1 asserts his date of birth to be 10.08.1995, and, that of the prosecutrix to be 01.01.1998. The marriage was not taken kindly by the family of the prosecutrix, and her father, opposite party no.3 here, lodged an FIR on 06.12.2017 at 4.00 p.m. with Police Station Bah, District Agra alleging that revisionist no.1 by blandishment had enticed away the prosecutrix. It was said that his other daughter, Jyoti witnessed the said occurrence and objected, whereupon revisionist no.1 extended threat of injury to life and limb and intimidated her. Jyoti informed third opposite party at his shop, whereupon he proceeded to the home of the first revisionist to complain in the matter. There he found a certain Bhurey, another Jai Kishore, Praveen and Nagendra; all of them repelled him aggressively by threat of assault and flourish of abuses. There are some not so material allegations in the FIR about those believed to be abbettors and conspirators. The revisionists which includes the prosecutrix threatened with arrest in connection with the FIR lodged by her father on completely misplaced and false allegations approached this Court together with the other co-accused in the crime that was registered on the basis of the FIR, last mentioned, seeking to have the same quashed.;