IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.1159 of 2010 SARSWATI DEVI Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 4. 18.11.2010. This matter was placed before us on 15.11.2010 and as per our direction dated 8.11.2010, the petitioner Sarswati Devi had also been produced before the court by the Superintendent, State Remand Home, Gaighat, Patna. No order was passed in favour of the petitioner for her release on that date because the order dated 13.8.2010 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria in Jokihat(Mahalgaon)P.S.Case No.198 of 2010 by which the petitioner has been remanded to the Remand Home, Gaighat, Patna was been brought on record. A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner bringing the order dated 31.8.2010 on record. On perusal of this order, it transpires that the medical report of the petitioner was before the concerned court on the day the order of remand was passed. As per the medical report, the age of petitioner has been assessed as 17 to 19 years. The statement of petitioner recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was also 2 within the knowledge of the court concerned wherein the petitioner being a major girl had disclosed that she wants to go with her husband and not with her parents. Despite all these facts, an order was passed whereafter, the petitioner was sent to Remand Home, Gaighat, Patna. This application has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of Writ of Habeas Corpus stating that once her age was determined and she found to be major, she should not have been remanded to the Remand Home, Gaighat, Patna. The period for which she has remained at Remand Home, Patna can not be treated as legal custody and she should be directed to be released at once. This has been submitted by the petitioner that she, in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. had specifically stated that she is willing to go with him in order to discharge her marital obligation. Considering all these facts and also the date on which the petitioner had been remanded she was not named as an accused in any police case, as such there was no occasion for keeping her in the Remand Home 3 or in any judicial custody. It was just, legal and proper that she should have been allowed to go as per her own wishes in the company of her husband. This is the settled law of the land, which has been ignored by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria while passing the order. Accordingly, the order dated 31.8.2010 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria in Jokihat(Mahalgaon)P.S.Case No.198 of 2010 is quashed. The petitioner is directed to be released forthwith. She is allowed to go in the company of her husband subject to the fulfillment of the formalities at the Remand Home. This application is allowed. B.Kr. ( Mridula Mishra,J. ) ( Dharnidhar Jha,J.)