JUDGMENT Hon’ble Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.—Learned counsel for the applicants and the learned State Counsel. None has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party No. 2. 2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash charge-sheet and the entire proceedings relating to case No. 1407 of 2007 arising from case crime No. 1066 of 2006 under Section 363/366/120-B I.P.C., police station Civil Lines, Muzaffar Nagar pending in the Court of A.C.J.M.,Muzaffar Nagar. 3. Submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that Smt.Sadiya, applicant No. 1 has already married with Munawwar, applicant No. 2, as averred in para 6 of the affidavit accompanying the present application and in support of his contention Nikahnama, annexures 2 and 3 have been filed. Learned counsel contends that this Court had directed that Sadiya, applicant No. 1 be medically examined. Smt.Sadia was examined and the medical report dated 27.2.2007, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure-5, reveals her age as 18-19 years. 4. Learned counsel submits that, as alleged, the occurrence had taken place on 23.11.2006; on that date also Smt.Sadia, applicant No. 1 was major. It is further submitted that since Smt.Sadia was major, as such, no offence under Sections 363/366/120-B I.P.C. is made out against the accused. 5. Learned counsel submits that the facts and circumstance of the present case is similar to that of the case of Lata Singh v. State of U.P. and another, 2006(5) ADJ 417 (SC), in which Hon’ble the Supreme Court has quashed the proceedings in Sessions Trial, including warrants against the accused, arising out of an F.I.R. under Sections 366/368 I.P.C. 6. Learned State Counsel does not controvert the contentions of learned counsel for the applicants with regard to the age of Smt. Sadia. 7. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. 8. Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Lata Singh v. State of U.P. and another (Supa), in a similar situation, has quashed the proceedings under Sections 366, 368 I.P.C., observing in para 14 as under : “14. This case reveals a shocking state of affairs. There is no dispute that the petitioner is a major and was at all relevant times a major. Hence she is free to marry anyone she likes or live with anyone she likes. This case reveals a shocking state of affairs. There is no dispute that the petitioner is a major and was at all relevant times a major. Hence she is free to marry anyone she likes or live with anyone she likes. There is no bar to an inter-caste marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act or any other law. Hence, we cannot see what offence was committed by the petitioner, her husband or her husband’s relatives.” 9. In the facts and circumstance of the case, I am of the view that no offence under Sections 363/366/120-B I.P.C. is made out. Charge-sheet and the proceedings relating to case No. 1407 of 2007 arising from case crime No. 1066 of 2006 under Sections 363/366/120-B I.P.C., police station Civil Lines, Muzaffar Nagar pending in the Court of A.C.J.M., Muzaffar Nagar are liable to be quashed. 10. Accordingly, the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed and charge-sheet and the proceedings relating to case No. 1407 of 2007 arising from case crime No. 1066 of 2006 under Sections 363/366/120-B I.P.C., police station Civil Lines, Muzaffar Nagar pending in the Court of A.C.J.M., Muzaffar Nagar are hereby quashed. ————