IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.7358 of 2010 Rubi Kumari @ Lusy Kumari @ Rubi, wife of Santosh Kumar, Mohalla Azijghat, PS Bihar, Dist. Nalanda – petitioner. Vs. 1. The State of Bihar, 2. Suresh Pandey, son of Late Hardeo Pandey, Mohalla Nai Sarai, PS Bihar, District Nalanda – opp. parties. 5 8.4.2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. This application has been filed against the order, dated 7.1.2010 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Nalanda in Cr. Revision No. 292/2009, by which the court has refused to release the petitioner on the ground that the girl is minor as per her school leaving certificate. The statement of the girl, on the other hand, is that she is 18 years of age and the medical report indicates that she is 17 years of age. This court had called the petitioner, opposite party no.2 i.e. father and the husband of the petitioner in chambers. The petitioner has given birth to a baby girl in the remand home and she insisted that she should be released from remand home and be permitted to go to her husband’s house. The father, on the other hand, was unhappy since the girl had married out of her caste to a boy who belongs to the category of backward caste. The father and mother both being Brahmin were aggrieved by this fact and expressed their feelings that it would lower their prestige and image in the village. The petitioner’s husband Santosh Kumar expressed his willingness to look after his wife and wanted to take her with him. The Incharge of the remand home was also present in court and she also expressed that 2 while living in the remand home, the girl several times approached her and begged her to allow to go to her husband’s house. Rubi Kumari appears to be between 17-18 years of age and the boy in question was about 19-20 years of age. Both of them declared that they were willing to live together and the boy had promised to look after the girl and maintain and keep her to the best of his ability. The case arises out of Bihar PS Case No. 177/2009 instituted under sections 366A/34 of the Penal Code. The girl was recovered from her husband’s house as a result of which she was sent to the remand home. In my opinion now that the girl and boy have married and they have a off spring and also considering that the girl is about17-18 years of age, I do not think that it will serve any useful purpose to retain her in the remand home. On a court question as to what would be the fate of the girl as now she has married and has a child, the father-opposite party no.2 stated that he would remarry his daughter and look after the child. Rubi Kumari stated that if she goes to her father’s house, she is sure that her child may be in danger and that her father would do away with the life of the child and then force her to get married to a third person. In all eventuality, a situation such as this would lead to further complications specially if the girl is re-married, she cannot under the law now remarry to any other person without obtaining divorce. I, therefore, direct that the petitioner should be released from the remand home and she should be free to go wherever she 3 wants and opposite party no.2 would not coerce her to go to his house. This application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. This order may be communicated to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalanda in Bihar PS Case No. 177/2009 and the Superintendent of Remand Home, Gaighat, Patna City at the cost of the petitioner. haque (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)