CRM No. M 21278 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 21278 of 2010 Date of decision: 28.09.2010 Jakir Khan alias Jakir Hussain ........ Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. R S Rai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Swarn Tiwana, Advocate for the petitioner Ms Preeti Chaudhary, AAG, Haryana for the respondent - State Mr. Kulbhshan Sharma, Advocate and Mr. B S Tewatia, Advocate for the complainant -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral) It is contended that the petitioner got married with prosecutrix on 15.01.2010. Thereafter, the present FIR was registered on 19.02.2010. On 11.05.2010, the present petitioner along with the prosecutrix had filed CRM M 5968 of 2010 in this Court seeking direction to protect their lives and liberty at the hands of the parents of the prosecutrix as they got married against their wishes. However, the prosecutrix was finally recovered and produced before the trial Court and her statement under CRM No. M 21278 of 2010 2 Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded. The fact remains that the prosecutrix was moving around with the present petitioner w.e.f. 15.01.2010 to 11.05.2010 from one place to other without raising any hue and cry. Thus, whether the said statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was made willingly or not, is yet to be considered. Learned counsel for the complainant, at this stage, has vehemently contended that as per the medico legal report, the age of the prosecutrix is 16 years. Hence, she is a minor. Her consent is thereafter irrelevant. Heared. It is apparent from the FIR that the age of the prosecutrix is stated to be 18 years. Even if, as per the medico legal report, the age of the prosecutrix is accepted as 16 years, the same can be two years either way and the said benefit will have to be given to the accused petitioner. As per the Muslim law, as held vide order dated 16.02.2010 passed by this Court in Crl. W.P. No. 623 of 2009 titled as Kammu v. State of Haryana and others, the age of puberty of Muslim girl is taken to be 15 years or age at which, she is capable of exercising her option. In view of the above, it is ordered that the petitioner shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge September 28, 2010 mohan