WWW.LIVELAW.IN CA 4532/2018 @ SLP(C) 8001/2018
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4532/2018 (arising out of SLP(C) No. 8001/2018) SUHANI & ANR.
Appellants VERSUS
STATE OF U.P. & ORS.
Respondents O R D E R
Leave granted. The question
present
the
appeal,
defensibility
by
of
special
the
order
leave, dated
calls
in
5.12.2017
passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Habeas
Corpus
Writ
Petition
No.
52290/2017.
The
said
petition was filed for issuance of a direction to produce the
present
petitioner
no.
1
before
the
Court
on
the
foundation that she is the wife of the petitioner no. 2 and has been kept in illegal detention by the respondent no. 3. It is necessary to mention here that at the behest of the respondent no. 4 - the father of the petitioner no. 1, an FIR was lodged under Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code.
It was contended before the High Court
that the petitioner no. 1 was about 19 years of age and Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by DEEPAK GUGLANI Date: 2018.04.26 16:32:11 IST Reason:
that her statement was recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, wherein she had stated that she had entered into wedlock with the petitioner no. 2.
WWW.LIVELAW.IN CA 4532/2018 @ SLP(C) 8001/2018
2
On
behalf
certificate
of
issued
the by
contesting the
respondent
Secondary
School
no.
3,
a
Examination
(C.B.S.E.), showing the date of birth of the petitioner no. 1 as 25.9.2003 was filed.
The High Court computed the age
and came to the conclusion that she was 13 years and 8 months old, and on that basis, treated her as a minor. However,
she
expressed
accompany her parents.
an
unequivocal
desire
not
to
The High Court directed that she
would be allowed to reside in the Nari Niketan, Allahabad. When the matter was listed before this Court on 6.4.2018, this Court directed the authorities to produce the petitioner no. 1 on 23.4.2018.
On 23.4.2018, it was
thought
be
apposite
that
she
should
examined
by
the
concerned department of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, and a further direction was issued that she should be allowed to reside alongwith escorts in the
U.P.
Bhawan,
New
Delhi,
which
was
acceded
to
by
Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, learned AAG for the State of Uttar Pradesh. We have received the report from the All India Institute examined
of the
Medical
Sciences,
petitioner
no.
New 1.
Delhi, The
which
has
radiological
examination and the final report/opinion on the same reads as follows:-
WWW.LIVELAW.IN CA 4532/2018 @ SLP(C) 8001/2018
3 “Radiological Examination X-Rays advised for age estimation:X-Ray Medial End of Clavicle, Sternum AP & Lat. view, Pelvis AP view, L.S. Spine -Lat. View, Wrist &
Elbow-AP
&
Lat.
View,
Shoulder-AP
view,
were
done in Radiology Department. Report of Radiological ExaminationAll epiphysis at elbow, shoulder and wrist joint fused, suggestive of age > 16.5 years. Fusion of iliac crest epiphysis, suggestive of age 19 + 1 years. Medial end of clavicle not fused, suggestive of age 22-27 years. S1 of sacrum not fused with S2, suggestive of age 17-24 years. Imp.:-Estimated Bone age is between 19-24 years. FINAL REPORT/OPINION: Considering
the
findings
of
physical,
dental
&
radiological examinations we are of the considered opinion
that
the
bone
age
of
petitioner
Miss
Suhani is between 19-24 years.” In view of the conclusion arrived at by the All India
Institute
of
Medical
Sciences,
we
are
of
the
considered opinion that the petitioner no. 1 is a major, and the High Court was not correct in directing her to stay in
the
Nari
Niketan,
Allahabad.
The
petitioner
admits the factum of marriage, before us.
no.
1
Therefore, she
is entitled to accompany the petitioner no. 2, who is her husband.
WWW.LIVELAW.IN CA 4532/2018 @ SLP(C) 8001/2018
4
In view of our conclusion that she is an adult and she had gone voluntarily with the petitioner no. 2 and entered into wedlock, the criminal proceedings initiated under Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner no. 2 stands quashed.
We have passed this
order of quashing the proceedings to do complete justice. The appeal is accordingly allowed and the impugned order
passed
by
the
High
Court
is
set
aside.
Pending
interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
..................CJI [Dipak Misra] ....................J. [A.M. Khanwilkar] ....................J. [Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud] New Delhi; April 26, 2018.
WWW.LIVELAW.IN CA 4532/2018 @ SLP(C) 8001/2018
5 ITEM NO.5
COURT NO.1
SECTION XI
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
I N D I A
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 8001/2018 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-12-2017 in HCWP No. 52290/2017 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad) SUHANI & ANR.
Petitioners VERSUS
STATE OF U.P. & ORS.
Respondents
Date : 26-04-2018 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Petitioners Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr.
Sanjai Kumar Pathak, AOR Arvind Kumar Tripathi, Adv. Rajeev Upadhyay, Adv. Akhilendra Singh, Adv.
For Respondents Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, AAG, U.P. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tyagi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted. The
appeal
is
allowed
in
terms
of
the
signed
order. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
(Deepak Guglani) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Assistant Registrar (signed order is placed on the file)
