IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.481 of 2009 SIMA KUMARI @ SIMA DEVI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 05- 17.9.2009 Heard Mr.Satish Kumar Sinha for the petitioner, Ms. Neelam Prasad, learned Assistant Counsel to GP 21 for respondent nos. 1 to 4, Mr. Virendra Kumar for respondent nos. 5 and 8, and Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh for respondent nos. 6 and 7. 2. The petitioner is the daughter of respondent nos. 5 and 8. She claims to have married respondent no.6 at Ranchi. Respondent no.7 is the father of respondent no.6. It is stated in this writ petition that the petitioner and respondent no.6 are residents of the same village where they met four years ago in the routine course of their life in the village. They developed close friendship and ultimately decided to marry, eloped from their village home to Ranchi where they married as per the Hindu rites on 5.5.2009, at Jagannathpur Mandir Nyas Samiti. Respondent no.8 (the petitioner’s mother), lodged First Information Report against respondent nos. 6 and 7, alleging abduction of her daughter. A copy of the FIR is marked Annexure-1 to the writ petition. The petitioner was thereafter taken to the Remand Home where she is still lodged. It is further stated that respondent nos. 5 and 8 are not approving the marriage because the two families belong to two different castes. It is further stated in the writ petition that she may be released from the Remand Home and may permitted to go to her matrimonial home. 3. We have perused the materials on record and considered - 2 - the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. By order dated 8.9.2009, respondent nos. 5 to 8 were directed to be personally present in court, and the petitioner was directed to be produced before us from the Remand Home. We have interviewed the petitioner, and respondent no. 6 separately in camera. We have also jointly interviewed respondent nos. 5 and 8, and have also separately interviewed respondent no.7. 4. Annexure -3 is a photocopy of school-leaving certificate dated 2.4.2009, which indicates that 10.1.1990 is the petitioner’s date of birth. It would be safe to presume that the date of birth had been provided by the parents of the petitioner, according to which the petitioner was a major on 5.5.2009, the date of their marriage. Annexure -2 is a photocopy of the certificate dated 5.5.2009, issued by the Jagannath Mandir Nyas Samiti, certifying the marriage as per Hindu rites at ranchi, on 5.5.2009. Annexue-4 is the petitioner’s deposition under the provisions of Section 164, Cr.P.C. before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, East Champaran, Motihari, wherein it is stated that the petitioner is married to respondent no.6, and wants to go to her matrimonial home to join her husband. At the behest of the court, the petitioner was subjected to medical examination and the doctor’s report is marked Annexure-5, wherein the doctor opines that the girl is aged 17 to 18 years as on 13th of May 2009. 5. During the course of her interview, the petitioner has submitted before us that she had eloped with respondent no.6 and - 3 - married him in the aforesaid temple at Ranchi on 5.5.2009, whereafter they had taken a room on rent in the township of Ranchi and lived like husband and wife, and the marriage was consummated. She submits that she may be directed to be released from the Remand Home and may be permitted to go to her matrimonial home to join her husband. Respondent no.6 has also stated to the same effect. Respondent no.7 has stated that the boy is a student of 3rd year in IIT, Dhanbad, and is also making some income out of private tution. He says that he himself is a school teacher and is drawing about Rs.25,000/- per month. He has also stated before us that he has only two sons – respondent no. 6 being the younger one, and the elder son is a Panchayat Shikshak. He has stated that he is ready to accept the petitioner as daughter-in-law, and would be happy to take her to his home in a situation where the petitioner and respondent no.6 are already married. He has also stated that he is in a position to support the petitioner as well as respondent no.6. 6. We have also interviewed respondent nos. 5 and 8 together in camera. Respondent no.5 has informed us that he is working in the police force of the Assam Government. He had sent his wife (respondent no.8) to the village along with the daughter to look after cultivation of their landed property at their village home. The boy is yet to settle in life, and they have serious apprehensions that the boy may ultimately abandon their daughter (the petitioner). Respondent no.8, the informant, has stated to the same effect, and has added that it is not possible for them to countenance inter-caste - 4 - marriage, both the families belonging to different castes, and they are threatened with the prospect that they may not be able to marry off their other daughters. 7. Taking into account the circumstances obtaining in this case it appears to us the respondent no.6 and the petitioner had eloped from their village home and reached Ranchi where they married in the temple in the aforesaid manner, whereafter they occupied a room on rent and lived together for four weeks and the marriage was consummated. Both of them are majors and capable of marrying of their own volition. On account of the FIR (Annexure 1), lodged by respondent no.8 against respondent nos. 6 and 7, she is lodged in the Remand Home, wherefrom she has been produced before us today under the protection of Superintendent of the Remand Home. In the circumstances of the case, we direct that the petitioner be released from the Remand Home and is permitted to go to her matrimonial home along with her husband and her father-in-law. It is further directed that the FIR bearing Dumariya Ghat PS Case No.25/09 dated 22.4.2009 (Annexure -1), is hereby quashed. 8. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. ( S K Katriar ) ( Shyam Kishore Sharma ) mrl - 5 -