Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Rita Devi vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors on 22 October, 2013

Author: Narendra Nath Tiwari

Bench: Narendra Nath Tiwari

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                 W.P. (Cr.) No.214 of 2013
            Rita Devi.                                         ......Petitioner. 
                                          ­Versus­
            The State of Jharkhand & Ors.                      ....... Respondents.
                                           ­­­­­­
           CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI
                                  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. P. BHATT
                                            ­­­­­­
            For the Petitioner :             Mr. Binod Singh, Advocate.     
            For the State            :       J.C. to A.A.G. 
                                            ­­­­­­
04/22.10.2013

: The petitioner claims to be the mother of the victim girl­ Madhu Kumari @ Kajal Kumari. 

2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for a direction on  the State respondents to produce the body of Madhu Kumari @  Kajal   Kumari  before   this   Court.   It   has   been   alleged  in   the   writ  petition that the girl is minor and she has been kidnapped by the  accused   persons.   An   F.I.R.   was   lodged   against   the   accused  persons in Patratu police station, being Patratu P.S. Case No.115  of   2012,   corresponding   to   G.R.   No.1694   of   2012,   and   case   has  been registered under Sections 366A120B and 34 of the Indian  Penal Code. 

3. On the basis of the said averment in the writ petition, the  State respondents were directed to produce the girl. 

4. In compliance of the direction of this Court, the girl­Madhu  Kumari @ Kajal Kumari has been produced before this Court by  Patratu police today. 

5. An   affidavit   has   also   been   filed   on   behalf   of   the   State  respondents,   stating,   inter   alia,   that   they   have   recovered   the  victim   girl   from   village   Dadikala.   In   course   of   investigation,  certificate   from   Government   Middle   School,   Sankul   has   been  obtained and the school register was examined. In the school  register,  her name is  recorded as  Kajal Kumari and  as   per  the  entry   made   in   the   register   and   certificate   issued   by   the  Headmaster of the school, her date of birth is 2nd October, 1998.  The   said   girl   was   recovered   and   produced   before   learned  Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribagh on 15th October, 2013. In  her   statement   under   Section   164   Cr.P.C.   recorded   by   learned  Judicial  Magistrate, 1st Class,  Hazaribagh,  the  girl  has  claimed  ­2­ to be aged 20 years. Learned  Magistrate has also assessed her  age as 20 years. In her statement, she had stated that she had  voluntarily   gone   with   Shamim   Ansari   and   married   with   him.   A  male  child  is   born  out   of  the   wedlock,   who   is  aged  about   six  months. She has also volunteered that she wants to live with her  husband­Shamim Ansari and her­in­laws.

6. On   the   other   hand,   the   petitioner   claimed   that   she   is  mother of the girl­Madhu Kumari @ Kajal Kumari and that she is  minor. She also alleged that the girl has been kidnapped by said  Shamim Ansari and she is being kept under illegal confinement  by him. 

7. We enquired from the girl regarding her age and claim of  her mother. She almost repeated the aforesaid version. She also  stated before this Court that the petitioner is not her mother. 

8. It   has   been   admitted   by   both   the   parties   that   an   F.I.R.  alleging kidnapping of the said girl against Shamim Ansari and  others   was   lodged   and   the   case   is   pending   in   the   court   of  learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribagh. 

9. Mr. Binod Singh, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of  the petitioner, submitted that  the  mother of the girl (petitioner  herein)   is   present   in   the   court   and   she   is   stunned   by   the  statement made by her daughter in the Court. Learned counsel  submitted that though she is in police custody, she is under the  influence of the accused persons and her statement is not free  and voluntary.  

10. Learned   counsel   submitted   that   the   controversies   arising  out of the versions of the petitioner and her daughters give rise to  the   factual   disputes   and   the   petitioner   shall   approach   the  appropriate   Court   for   adjudication   and   decision   of   the   said  disputes.     

11. Learned counsel for the petitioner for that purpose seeks  permission   to   withdraw   this   writ   petition   with   a   liberty   to  approach the competent court for adjudication of said disputes.

12. Learned   counsel   appearing   on   behalf   of   the   State  respondents has no objection to the said prayer. 

­3­

13. Permission as sought for by the petitioner is granted. This  writ   petition   is   disposed   of   as   withdrawn   with   liberty   to   the  petitioner   to   approach   the   appropriate   forum   for   seeking  redressal of the cause claimed by her.  

        

 (Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.)             (P. P. Bhatt, J.)  Sanjay/