IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.991 of 2010 SAHEBI KHATOON @ SAHEBI Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2. 23.9.2010. Heard Sri Nayeeb Ahmad, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Wasi Ahmad Khan, learned counsel for the respondent no.6 and Sri Prabhat Kr. Singh, learned counsel for the State. The petitioner Sahebi Khatoon @ Sahebi has been produced before this court as per the direction dated 21.9.2010. Petitioner’s prayer is for a direction to the respondent to release her immediately from the illegal confinement, so that she may start to live with her husband. The facts of the case is that petitioner and respondent no.6 Md. Arif got married as per their own choice and since it was not a marriage of their parents consent, so they thought it proper to go away for some time from their place of residence, in order to get the matter settled. Petitioner and her husband went to Kolkata and for some time they resided there. The father of the petitioner Abdus Salam filed a written complaint before officer-in-charge of Azam Nagar police station alleging that her minor daughter Sahebi Khatoon has been kidnapped by respondent no.6 and other eight accused persons, Azam Nagar police station case no. 76 of 2010 was registered for offence under Section 363, 2 366, 379, 120B and 34 of the IPC. On 6.7.2010. The respondent no.6 was arrested at Kokata. The petitioner was also brought and produced before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katihar. She was sent for her medical examination to get her age assessed and her statement was also recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., wherein she narrated her case regarding her marriage with the respondent no.6 being a consented marriage and also that she has not been kidnapped by any one. She also disclosed that on account of this marriage, she is carrying a pregnancy of eight months. The medical report, also disclosed that she is carrying a pregnancy of 32-34 weeks and her age was assessed in between 16-17 years. As per own disclosure of the petitioner she was 20 years but the court assessed it as 18 years. All these facts indicate that even though a police case has been instituted against respondent no.6, alleging kidnapping of the petitioner but in reality it was not a case of kidnapping, rather it was a case of elopement. The petitioner being practically major, on account of her age being 16-17 years, and by adding three years as per the judgment of the Apex Court in Jaimala Vrs. Home Secretary, Govt. of Jammu and Kashmir reported in AIR 1982 SC 1297, her age should have been presumed to be 19 years which is the age of majority. Being major she was legally entitled to decide her own fate and to live with the person of her choice. In the given facts and circumstances of case, 3 there was no reason to arrest the respondent no.6, and for sending the petitioner to after Care Home at Patnacity. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katihar, without considering the legal aspect of the matter, and completely ignoring the medical report, as well as the statement of the petitioner recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C, passed an order of remand of petitioner to after Care Home at Patnacity. By passing the impugned order, the C.J.M., Katihar committed illegality also for the reason that even though the petitioner was not an accused in any case, either in a police case or in a complaint case, she was treated as an accused, and sent to Remand Home, which was nothing but illegal confinement of the petitioner. There was no reason for sending her to Remand Home, when she had expressed her desire to go and live with her parents in law. This kind of illegality is being committed repeatedly by Judicial Officers throughout the State of Bihar. In so many cases, of similar facts we have passed such orders, but still we find, similar error being committed by courts, due to which Criminal Writs, for issuance of Habeas Corpus are repeatedly being filed. In such case, confinement of writ petitioners ( girls who are majors) at Remand Home is illegal confinement and fit for issuance of Writ of Habeaus Corpus. Section 483 of the Cr.P.C. imposes a duty on 4 High Courts to exercise continuous superintendence over the courts ; Judicial Magistrate, Subordinate to it, and to see that cases are expeditiously and properly disposed of by such Courts. In present nature of case, it seems to have been essential that a general direction be issued to all Magistrates of Subordinate Courts to exercise their jurisdiction, properly and judiciously. In exercise of jurisdiction u/S 483 Cr.P.C. all Judicial Magistrates/Chief Judicial Magistrates throughout the State of Bihar are directed to, decide such cases in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in Jaimala Vrs. Home Secretary, Govt. of Jammu and Kashmir reported in AIR 1982 SC 1297. The girl should be treated as major if she is assessed to be of an age in between 16 to 17 years as per the medical report and also as per own assessment . In such cases, instead of sending such girls to Remand Home or after Care Home, they should be released to go with the people of their choice. This order should be circulated to all Chief Judicial Magistrate and all Judicial Magistrates in the State of Bihar for proper compliance. The petitioner Sahebi Khatoon @ Sahebi, has suffered a lot, on account of her illegal confinement, as she has lost her baby. Due to lack of care and proper treatment she gave birth to a dead child. Petitioner’s husband Respondent no.6 is present and eager to take his wife along with him. She is being released to go in the company of her 5 husband from the court itself. In case any formalities are to be completed before being released from the Remand Home, the petitioner and her husband will go to the Remand Home and complete that formality. B.Kr. ( Mridula Mishra,J. ) ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)