Sanjiv Khanna, J. (ORAL);—

Mr. Rajeev Mehra, Additional Solicitor General has entered appearance and has drawn our attention to 2(2) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. He has further relied on the Full Bench decision of this Court in Court on its own motion (Lajja Devi) vs. State, 2012 (193) DLT 619.

2. Mr. Pawan Sharma, learned standing counsel has drawn our attention to the order dated 22nd January, 2013 passed in W.P. (Crl.) 1025/2012 titled Furqan v. State.

3. Bholu Khan and Shama Parveen admit that they got married as per the Muslim rites on 16th July, 2012. Shama Parveen states that the said marriage was solemnized without any force or coercion as per her wishes and desire and accepts Bholu Khan, the petitioner herein, as her husband. She has made similar statement under Section 164 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the Metropolitan Magistrate.

4. The present writ petition was filed on 5th October, 2012 and on 1st November, 2012, Shama Parveen was produced in the Court. On the said date, Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate had entered appearance on behalf of Bhure Khan, father of the girl i.e. Shama Parveen. The writ petition was adjourned to 3rd December, 2012.

5. On 3rd December, 2012, the matter was passed over to enable the parties to interact with each other and was taken up at 3.30 P.M. Bholu Khan, Bhure Khan and Shama Parveen were spoken to in the Chamber. Bhure Khan, father of Shama Parveen in categorical terms had stated that he cannot accept marriage of Shama Parveen with Bholu Khan due to social pressure and compulsions. Shama Parveen had reiterated her desire to live with Bholu Khan and expressed that she did not want to stay in Nirmal Chaya.

6. In these circumstances, in the order dated 3rd December, 2012, we had requested the Child Welfare Committee to counsel Shama Parveen and guide her, on various aspects, including the problems faced by young girls, in case they get married and have children. Direction was issued to provide vocational training to her, as per her ability. Bholu Khan was also asked to report for counselling and Child Welfare Committee was requested to explain various issues and aspects to him. Thereafter, two hearings were held on 7th January, 2013 and 15th January, 2013.

7. Today we have received the action taken report from the Child Welfare Committee. The said report states that a counselling session was held on 22nd January, 2013 with Bholu Khan and Shama Parveen. Photocopy of the counselling report has been enclosed.

8. Shama Parveen has been housed in Nirmal Chaya since 28th July, 2012, since she does not want to reside and live with her parents and wants to live with Bholu Khan and his family.

9. The difficulty remains as Shama Parveen may or may not be 18 years of age. As per the school records her date of birth is 16th July, 1996. Shama Parveen disputes the said date of birth and claims that she is more than 18 years of age. Bhure Khan, father of Shama Parveen had stated that he had got married some years before the death of Mr. Rajiv Gandhi, former Prime Minister of India. He had averred that his first child was born in the year in which Mr. Rajiv Gandhi expired, but was unable to give the exact date. Shama Parveen is his third child. The date of birth recorded in the school records is therefore not true and correct date or veritable but a convenient date or a guess.

10. As per the ossification test report dated 16th September, 2012, Shama Parveen was about 16 years old, plus/minus one year. This again is a mere estimation and variation is possible. Thus, it is clear that the exact age is somewhat uncertain.

11. We have spoken to Shama Parveen at great lengths in the Chamber and find that she is mature and understands the consequences of the choice she is making. As noticed above, she has been repeatedly counselled on several aspects and issues. She has spent 7 months in Nirmal Chaya but her decision to live with Bholu Khan is consistent. It is apparent that