IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.1220 of 2010 RANJEET SAH Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 3. 01.12.2010. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the State. Everyday a number of similar applications are being placed before us, in which prayer of the petitioner, is for release of victim girl from the Remand Home, on the ground that the victim girl is in illegal confinement. Petitioner in the present case, Ranjeet Sah, has prayed for release of Rinki Kumari @ Rinki Devi (respondent no.12). He claims to be the husband of respondent no.12. The prayer for release has been made on the ground that respondent no. 12 is not an accused in Kanti P.S. Case No. 150 of 2010. She is major, as her age on the basis of the report submitted by the Medical Board is between 17 to 19 years. Respondent no.12 herself in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has disclosed that she is 19 years of age. Respondent no. 12 was apprehended by the police as she had left her 2 parents house without giving any information to them, in order to marry the petitioner. The father of Rinki Kumari (respondent no.11) had filed Kanti P.S. Case No.150 of 2010 stating that his minor daughter has been abducted by the petitioner and his family members. The S.D.J.M. (West) Muzaffarpur, before whom respondent no. 12 was produced by the police, ordered her remand to Remand Home, Gaighat, Patna City by the order dated 2.7.2010, treating her to be a minor girl. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 2.7.2010 passed by S.D.J.M. (West) Muzaffarpur is illegal and without jurisdiction, as it has been passed completely ignoring the law settled in this regard by the Apex Court in A.I.R 1982 Supreme Court 1297 Jay Mala Vs. Secretary, State of Jammu & Kashmir. The age of respondent no. 12 being assessed by the Medical Board in between 17 to 19 years. The S.D.J.M. (West) Muzaffarpur should have considered her age to be 19 years in stead of 17 years. The Court concerned, has committed serious jurisdictional error by remanding 3 respondent no. 12 to the Remand Home. The respondent no. 12 herself had filed two applications before the S.D.J.M. for her release but those were rejected stating that as per his conscience and wisdom it is not proper to release a minor girl. We find that, in such matters the C.J.Ms. and the S.D.J.Ms, before whom identical matters are placed, fail to decide the issue in accordance with law settled by the Apex Court in AIR 1982(SC)1297 Jaya Mala Vrs. Secretary of Jammu and Kashmir. In this decision, it has been held that in case a girl elopes with a boy and thereafter gets married, in such cases, even if the age of the girl is assessed less than 18 years, court should add two years to her age, in order to pass an order of release from Remand Home. In the present case, the respondent no. 12 as per the S.D.J.Ms wisdom was 17 years but in view of settled law she should have been considered to be of 19 years age and should have been released to go any where she liked. The S.D.J.M. has committed a jurisdictional error by not passing such 4 order in the present matter. Today, Rinki Kumari @ Rinki Devi respondent no.12 has been produced before us by the Superintendent, Govt. Girls Remand Home, Gaighat, Patnacity, Patna. Considering her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as well as the medical report, she is major and competent to decide whether she wants to go with her husband or with any one else. Since, she is willing to go with her husband, as such, we issue direction for her release. She is being released forthwith subject to completion of some formalities at Remand Home. This application is allowed. The order dated 2.7.2010 passed by S.D.J.M(West), Muzaffarpur is quashed. B.Kr. ( Mridula Mishra,J. ) ( Dharnidhar Jha,J.)