CRM No. M- 3232 of 2009 (O&M) 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. CRM No. M- 3232 of 2009 (O&M) Decided on:- 21.05.2009 Manju Bala and another ……Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another …….Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice K. C. Puri Present Mr. Kailash Chander, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate for respondent no.2. Ms. Neena Madan, Addl. A. G, Haryana. K. C. Puri, J.(Oral ) This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the FIR No.418 dated 6.10.2008, under Sections 363, 366 IPC, registered with P. S. Palwal Sadar, District Faridabad. The petitioners have sought quashing on the basis of the fact that Manju Bala, petitioner no.1 is aged 22 years and has voluntarily entered into marriage with Dharamvir Singh, petitioner no.2. In the reply by State of Haryana, it is mentioned that date of birth of Manju Bala is 4.3.1994 and the occurrence is alleged to be of 4.10.2008. So, according to the birth certificate, she was less than 15 years on the date of occurrence. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted petitioner no.1 Manju Bala is ready for ossification test. He has further contended that school transfer certificate and middle class certificate does not prove the authenticity regarding the age. I have carefully considered that statement. That fact can be adjudicated only during the course of trial. Prima facie, age of the prosecutrix was less than 15 years. So, in view of the above submissions made by learned counsel for respondent, offence under Section363 & 366 IPC is prima facie made out. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that State has relied upon the ration card, according to which, the age of Manju Bala, petitioner no.1 is recorded as 16 years and that ration card relates to 1 and CRM No. M- 3232 of 2009 (O&M) 2 ½ years prior to the filing of this petition, however, the validity of the ration card and other evidence regarding the age of Manju Bala, petitioner no.1 can only be appreciated during the course of trial. Prima facie, no case for quashing of the FIR is made out. Consequently the petition stands dismissed. May 21, 2009 ( K.C. Puri ) Mamta Judge