IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.1005 of 2009 RAKESH KUMAR & ANR Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2 16.8.2010 The petitioners pray for quashing the F.I.R. of Samastipur (Muffasil) P.S. Case No.633 of 2009 for an offence under sections 370/34 as well as section 366A of the Penal Code. One Sarwan Kumar Sah, who is the informant of the case, stated that his niece Jyoti Kumari, aged about 15 years has been kidnapped by Rakesh Kumar and others. Rakesh Kumar and Jyoti Kumari have filed the instant case stating that Jyoti Kumari is a major and aged about 20 years. It is further stated in paragraph 9 that on 25.10.2009 they married each other at Arya Samaj Vedic marriage Mandal, Jamuna Bazar, New Delhi and a certificate to this effect was also issued by the Arya Samaj Marriage Mandal, contained in Annexure-2. It is further stated that petitioner no.2 Jyoti Kumari has also filed a petition before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur stating therein that she has not been abducted. A supplementary affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the petitioners from which it appears that petitioner no.2 Jyoti Kumari deposed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur under section 164 Cr.P.C wherein she has stated that 2 KHAN her age was 19 years and she married with petitioner no.1 Rakesh Kumar on her own free will and is running pregnancy of seven months as well. Learned counsel for the petitioners in support of his contention relied upon a decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Lata Singh Vs State of U.P., reported in 2006(3) P.L.J.R.(SC) 329 wherein it has been held that a major boy or girl is free to marry anyone of their choice. Learned State Counsel has filed a counter affidavit. As copy of the counter affidavit is not on record, this court sought a copy of the same from learned counsel for the petitioner. It appears that the police has submitted charge sheet under section 366A/34 of the Penal Code against accused Prakash Kumar and the investigation against the other accused is still pending. As the charge sheet has been submitted against one of the accused and the statement of victim girl under section 164 Cr.P.C. is also on record, the learned Magistrate would take a decision whether to take cognizance and summon petitioner no.1 to face trial or not in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ application stands disposed of. (S.P.Singh,J)