IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.401 of 2008 BABITA KUMARI Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 03/ 15-07-2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and J.C. to A.A.G. 11. This writ application has been filed for quashing the F.I.R. of Nagarnausa P.S. Case No. 42 of 2008 under Sections 366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code which has been registered on the basis of statement of the informant (respondent no. 4). It has been submitted that petitioner Babita Kumari is the victim of this case. She has performed marriage with accused Pramod Kumar Gupta on 28.3.2008 in the premises of Vishnupad Mandir, Gaya. The management committee of the Mandir has issued marriage certificate in favour of petitioner Babita Kumari and accused Pramod Kumar Gupta. Learned counsel further submitted that on the date of marriage the victim girl and accused Pramod Kumar Gupta both were major. In this connection he referred to Annexure-4 to the application and submitted that the date of birth of Babita Kumari as recorded in the transfer certificate is 18.12.1989. He further submitted that since they have performed inter caste marriage and, therefore, the parents of Babita Kumari are not happy and they have filed the present case with a view to pressurize the petitioner’s husband and others. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court directs that if the petitioner Babita Kumari appears before the Investigating Officer/Superintendent of Police, Nalanda, then they 2 would take steps for recording her statement. The statement of the victim girl would be recorded in presence of the informant (respondent no. 4). The petitioner would be free to produce certificate in support of her age before the Police Officer. The I.O. would also be free to get the victim girl medically examined. The Police shall submit the report to the learned Magistrate concerned with regard to the petitioner’s age within three weeks from the date of her appearance. Till submission of the report, no coercive step shall be taken in connection with Nagarnausa P.S. Case No. 42 of 2008 either against the petitioner or other accused persons including accused Pramod kumar Gupta with whom she claims to have performed marriage. In face of the above order no notice is necessary to respondent no. 4. With the aforesaid observations/directions this application stands disposed of. Let the order be communicated through fax at the cost of the petitioner. S.Sb/- (Madhavendra Saran, J.)