Abdul Mateen and Ashwani Kumar Singh, JJ.- Heard Sri H.A. Alvi, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri Manoj Kumar Tewari, learned Counsel for opposite party No. 3 and learned Addi­tional Government Advocate. In pursuance of order of this Court dated 20.1.2011, opposite party No. 3 Mohammad Nadeem has produced prose-cutrix Rahila. Investigating Officer of case Crime No. 452 of 2010 under sections 363 and 366 IPC of Police Station Hasanganj, district Lucknow, namely, Sri Vijai Kumar Singh is also present along with the case diary. 2. We have gone through the state­ment of the prosecutrix Rahila recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. as well as under section 164 Cr.P.C. We have also gone through the medical examination report of prosecutrix Rahila in which the doctor, on the basis of X-ray report and ossification test of the prosecutrix, has opined her age to be above 18 years. 3. Learned Counsel for respondent has produced before the Court High School Certificate of Rahila of the year 2007 wherein her age has been mentioned to be 22.11.1993, meaning thereby that prosecu­trix Rahila has passed her High School at the age of less than 14 years. On the record of the writ petition, there is no birth certifi­cate of prosecutrix Rahila. 4. Be that as it may, from the medical certificate it is evident that prosecutrix Ra­hila is more than 18 years of age and she is carrying pregnancy of approximate seven weeks. It is worth mentioning here that after recovery of the prosecutrix, she was given in the custody of her father, opposite party No. 3 Mohammad Nadeem. By means of this petition, the petitioner has claimed custody of prosecutrix Rahila on the ground that the petitioner and prosecu­trix Rahila have entered into marriage out of their free will and she has wrongly been given in the custody of her father. On being asked from prosecutrix Rahila as to whether she intends to reside with her fa­ther, she replied that she has married peti­tioner Mohammad Rasheed and wants to reside with him. 5. On being asked from prosecutrix Rahila as to whether she intends to reside with her fa­ther, she replied that she has married peti­tioner Mohammad Rasheed and wants to reside with him. 5. Taking into consideration the overall aspect of the matter as well as the age of the prosecutrix as mentioned in the High School Certificate as well as in the medical examination report and also from her appearance which is indicative that she has attained majority, we direct that the petitioner shall not be arrested in case crime No. 452 of 2010 under sections 363 & 366 IPC of Police Station Hasanganj, dis­trict Lucknow till submission of report un­der section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. However, inves­tigation shall go on and the petitioner shall cooperate with the same. 6. It is further provided that prosecu­trix Rahila is free to live at the place as she may wish and no restriction in any manner shall be imposed upon her by opposite party No. 3 Mohammad Nadeem curtailing her right of living at the place of her choice. 7. Subject to the above observa­tions/directions., the writ petition is finally disposed of. Petition Disposed Of.