Court No. - 52
Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 3515 of 2018 Petitioner :- Monika And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sankatha Devi,Arvind Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sanjive Kumar Gupta
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record, I find that pursuant to the F.I.R. lodged by the respondent no.4 vide Case Crime No.2 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366, 368, 376 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4, 16/16 of POCSO Act, P.S. Ujhani, District Badaun I.P.C., the petitioner no.1 had approached this Hon'ble Court for quashing of first information report which was disposed of with certain directions to the court below for recording the statement of victim and also determine her age. It was also observed that in case the victim is found to be minor then her custody be decided by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Badaun.
Pursuant to the directions of this Hon'ble Court, by an order dated 23.7.2018, she was sent to Nari Niketan after holding that the age of the victim is 15 years 5 months and 15 days. As the corpus was carrying pregnancy, she moved an application during her stay in Nari Niketan that she is ready to live with her mother. Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed an order dated 2.8.2018 whereby, on the prayer made by the corpus that she may be given in the custody of her mother, C.JM., Badaun accepted the same and at present by a judicial order the corpus is living with her mother.
If the petitioner no.2 has any grouse against the order dated 2.8.2018 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Badaun, the same may be challenged before the appropriate forum.
In view of the aforesaid, the instant habeas corpus writ petition is not maintainable as the custody of the corpus has been given to her mother by a judicial order and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 21.2.2019 Vikas