Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 1186 (PAT)

Vikash Kumar Sinha @ Viccky v. State Of Bihar

2006-12-05

NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH

body2006
Judgment 1. The present application has been filed for setting aside the order of Additional District and Sessions Judge XII, Patna, passed in Cr. Rev. No. 227/06 whereby the learned Judge holding the girl, in question (so referred for anonymity) was not a major directed that she be released in favour of her natural parents. 2. The short facts are that the petitioner alleges that the girl, in question, is a major and. out of her sweet will and consent she married him and the marriage was duly solemnized under the provisions of Special Marriage Act. Immediately, thereafter the mother of the girl, in question, filed an FIR that the petitioner and his family members had kidnapped the girl, in question, also she allegedly made a statement before the Magistrate under sec. 164 Cr.P.C. that she was adult and had married the petitioner and wanted to stay with him. She and the petitioner are said to have filed an application to that effect before the Chief Judicial Magistrate. Under these circumstances, she was ordered to be released in care of her alleged uncle-in-law. This is an order that was set aside in revision by the Additional Sessions Judge, Xllth, Patna and impugned in this court. 3. Initially this Court being persuaded by the statement under Sec.164 Cr.P.C. and basing the factum of registered marriage, by order dated 7.11.2006 directed for production of the girl under proper escort before this Court. On mention being made this Court took up the matter on 9.11.2006 wherein this court gave time to the mother of the girl to produce the girl in court yesterday. 4. Yesterday the case was fixed at 10.30 A.M. in Chambers. The court considering that whatever may be the legality of the order passed the question was about the will of the girl. If she desires to stay with her husband, it was her choice and her parents have too little to do about, that is, if she was married and if she was a minor then she had to be in the custody of her mother notwithstanding her will otherwise. 5. To ascertain her age and her will I took the liberty of talking to her, the petitioner, the mother of the girl and discussing the matter with their counsel separately in Chambers. I find that the girl at least today has decided not to stay with the petitioner. 5. To ascertain her age and her will I took the liberty of talking to her, the petitioner, the mother of the girl and discussing the matter with their counsel separately in Chambers. I find that the girl at least today has decided not to stay with the petitioner. She disclosed that in between she has married one Randhir Kumar Singh and they had gone to Pune after the marriage and now she was staying with him at Gaya. She do not want to either stay with her mother or with the petitioner. 6. The petitioner, on the other hand, stated that she was staying under pressure of her mother. Again I talked to the girl, in question, she was adamant and said that she had been threatened all along by the petitioner into making a statement made earlier and she maintained that she wanted to stay with Randhir Kumar Singh whatever may be the consequences. She absolutely denied having written the letters by her. I then discussed the matter with the lawyers of both the parties. To my mind the girl appears to be major and she is presently taking informed decision about her life. This court is not called upon to determine whether she is legally justified in taking that decision or what are legal consequences thereof. It is not possible for this court nor permissible to force its views on the girl, in question. If she is still under some pressure of her mother then she has to face the consequences because she frankly admitted that she was not under any pressure from anyone to make any particular statement. She has realised the consequences of all that has happened and still maintained that she will not live wuh the petitioner but with Randhir Kumar Singh. In the opinion of the Court, she is competent to take a decision. It is her decision which is to prevail over the decision of her parents or the petitioner and she is aware of the consequences that await her. The Court is not expected nor can do anything more in view of the stand taken by her in person. 7. Therefore, I left with no option but to dismiss this writ application.