JUDGMENT Mohd. Hamid Hussain, J. - The learned Sessions judge has made a recommendation to this Court for the setting aside of the impugned order of the judicial Officer City, Meerut, dated February 19, 1973 directing Smt. Gomti, a minor girl aged about 16 years, to be given in the custody of Sri Chand, the alleged husband. 2. The brief facts are that Sri Chand filed a complaint on July 31, 1972 under section 498 I.P.C. against Sukhbir Singh and Mahabir alleging that they had enticed away his wife Smt. Gomti The magistrate issued warrant and Smt. Gomti appeared in court on August 5, 1972, She applied for recalling the warrant. The court directed her to execute a personal bond in the sum of Ks. 500/- for her appearance in Court on subsequent dates. Smt. Gomti executed the personal bond but she could not appear in court subsequently on account of illness. On October 23, 1972 Smt. Gomti appeared in court. Request was made on behalf of complainant to put her in the Government protection Home. The orders were accordingly passed. Sub- sequently on the application by Sri Chand the Magistrate directed Smt. Gomti to be given in his custody. This order was resisted by Smt. Gomti and her brother. They went up in revision which was dismissed by the Sessions Judge. Later on another application was moved on February 15, 1973 by Sukhbir Singh one of the accused persons that Smt. Gomti be summoned from Nari Niketan and the court should ascertain her wishes. In the meantime Sri Chand sought police help to take custody of Smt. Gomti from Nari Niketan. The magistrate on February 19, 1973 passed a final order on the application of Sukhbir Singh directing that Smt. Gomti be given for custody to Sri Chand from Nari Niketan. Against this order revision was filed by Smt. Gomti in the court of the Sessions Judge who recommended for the setting aside of the impugned order on the ground that the magistrate had no jurisdiction to direct the physical delivery of Smt. Gomti to the complainant Sri Chand. 3. Against this order revision was filed by Smt. Gomti in the court of the Sessions Judge who recommended for the setting aside of the impugned order on the ground that the magistrate had no jurisdiction to direct the physical delivery of Smt. Gomti to the complainant Sri Chand. 3. I have seen the explanation of the magistrate concerned and have also heard Sri D.P. Mittal, learned counsel for the opposite party who has strenuously contended that the order passed by the magistrate was perfectly a legal order because earlier Smt. Gomti had herself admitted in her statement that she was married to Sri Chand and lived with him as his wife for two days. 4. Considering the facts of the case it is obvious that Smt. Gomti is not prepared to stay with Sri Chand and prefers to stay in Nari Niketan. She is only a witness in the complaint filed by Sri Chand. The magistrate has no jurisdiction to order the physical deli- very of Smt. Gomti against her wishes through police force to Sri Chand. Even an unwilling wife or a minor is entitled to express her or his wish to the court to either go with the particular person or not and if the minor is sufficiently nature in mind, then it is the bounded duty of the court to give due considerations to the wishes of the minor and not pass an order for delivery of the minor bodily to a person with whom the minor is not prepared to go. Smt. Gomti should be kept at Nari Niketan where she-will not be influenced either by Sri Chand or by the persons who are being prosecuted for enticing her away. 5. The impugned order of the Judicial Officer dated February 19, 1973 is quashed and it is directed that Smt. Gomti shall be kept in the Nari Niketan so long as she wishes to live there. Whenever it is necessary for her to appear in court in the complaint case, the Superintendent of Police Meerut shall make necessary arrangement for escorting Smt. Gomti safely from Nari Niketan to the court and then back to the Nari Niketan. 6. The reference is accepted.