Court No. - 32
Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 3677 of 2018 Petitioner :- Km. Rinki Verma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mamta Sen,Rajeev Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Shashi Kant,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned AGA and perused the record.
This writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of habeas corpus directing the respondent nos. 2 and 3 to produce the petitioner no. 1 (corpus Km. Rinki Verma) before this Court and set her free from their illegal custody.
In pursuance of the order dated 12.10.2018, the detenue Km. Rinki Verma has been produced before us by respondent no. 3, the Superintendent of Government Shelter Home (Nari Niketan), Allahabad.
Upon a specific query made from the corpus petitioner no.1 Km. Rinki Verma, flatly refused to stay with her parents.
Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. (Annexure-4) on 09.07.2018, the corpus has not supported the prosecution case and she has specifically stated in her statement that her parents harassed her and she left her house with her own sweet will and she want to live separately. According to Certificate issued by C.M.O., Allahabad (Annexure-4) her radiological age was found to be 19 years. In this view of the matter, her detention in Nari Niketan, Allahabad is wrong and illegal and she be set at liberty.
In reply, learned A.G.A. stated that the consent of a minor is no consent and the court below has rightly sent the petitioner (detenue) to Nari Niketan since she has refused to go alongwith her parents.
It is evident from the perusal of the record as well as the order passed by Special Judge, (S.C./S.T.) Act, Allahabad dated 13.07.2018 (Annexure-5), that as per Intermediate Marksheet as well as Transfer Certificate, the date of birth of the corpus is 15.04.2002 and she is minor and as per Section 94 (2) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, for determination of age High School Certificate will prevail over other documents and only in absence of it, other documents and medical evidence have to be considered. In view of above the corpus was minor on the date of incident and is still minor.
We are aware that normally even minor corpus should not be kept in concerned Nari Niketan against her wishes but in the instant case, the corpus petitioner no. 1 does not want to go with her parents and expressed her willingness to live separately and she specifically stated in her statement that she did not Know Najim. Ansari who is an accused in the case lodged by respondent no. 4, under Sections 363, 366, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3 (2) (v) of S.C./S.T. Act, (Annexure-1). In view of this, corpus could not be permitted to live with him. Admittedly corpus is minor and she could not be left on the street. In these circumstances, keeping in view of protection of interest of corpus along with her safety and security, we find it desirable that she should be kept in protection home/Nari Niketan till attaining her age of majority and thereafter she should be set at liberty to move the place of her choice.
For the above discussion, we do not find any merits in this writ petition and it is liable to be dismissed.
The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed.
The corpus petitioner no. 1 Km. Rinki Verma (detenue) who has been produced today, be taken back to the concerned Nari Niketan, Allahabad where she shall be kept until attaining majority. The Superintendent of Nari Niketan will strictly adhere to Rule of law and procedure prescribed and she/he will also ensure that during stay of corpus in Nari Niketan, Allahabad, she should not be caused any physical, mental or psychological harm in any manner.
Concerned District Magistrate and District Judge shall ensure that CCTV Camera, if not already installed, be installed in the Nari Niketan/Protection Home immediately and regular monitoring be made by them.
Order Date :- 29.10.2018 Monika