JUDGMENT 1. - Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar Choudhary learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri R.S. Rathore, learned Additional Advocate General for the State. In this case the proceedings against the petitioners were initiated under Section 13 of the Child Marriage (Restraint) Act, 2006 and as per the finding of the learned court below the petitioner was identified to be below the 18 years of age. As such was restrained from entering into marriage and the SHO police station, Nadbai District Bharatpur was directed to ensure the compliance of the order. 2. During the course of hearing before this court it was found necessary to enquire whether the Act, 2006 (Central Act VI) 2006 had been brought into force by issuance of the notification sub section 3 of Section 1 of the Act of 2006. 3. While it was noticed that the Presidential assent to the Act of 2006 had been received on 10.01.2007 but as required by Sub-Section (3) of Section 1 of the Act 2006 Government has not issued the concerned notification for bringing the Act of 2006 in force. 4. In view of the above, this court thought it proper to call the Director (Prosecution) to enquire whether the concerned notification bringing into force the Act of 2006 had been issued. 5. On 31.05.2007 Shri A.R. Patwardhan, Director (Prosecution) appeared before this court the said order reads as under : "31.05.2007. Shri A.R. Patwardhan, the Director (Prosecution), is present-in- person. The learned Additional Government Advocate as well as the Director (Prosecution), both, admit that the State Government has not issued any Notification under Sub-Section (3) of Section 1 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006. List the matter for further orders tomorrow. The Director (Prosecution) needs not come on the next date." 6. In view of the above statement as recorded it is clear that in the absence of the notification the Act of 2006 has not been brought into force. Consequently the proceedings which were initiated against the petitioner under the Act, 2006 in Criminal Case No. 89/2007, State v. Amari Devi are required to be quashed and the order dated 19.04.2007 passed under Section 13 of the Act of 2006 is set aside. The learned Magistrate in view of the above is free to proceed against the petitioners under the Act of 1929. The learned Magistrate in view of the above is free to proceed against the petitioners under the Act of 1929. The petitioners are directed to appear before the learned Magistrate on 15.06.2007. Meanwhile I deem it just and proper in the facts and circumstances more particularly as the age was found to be below 18 years to direct that the petitioner No. 1 shall not enter into marriage till the disposal of the case by the learned Magistrate.This petition stands disposed of as above.Petition Disposed of as above. *******