IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CR. WJC No.384 of 2009

KUMARI BINDHYAVASINI SHARMA w/o Anuj Kumar

Yadav @ Ashutosh Kumar and d/o Shri Jaidev Prasad Sharma,

resident of Mohalla- Chuabagh, P.S. Kashim Bazar, District-

Munger, presently residing at the house of the husband at

Mohalla- Sandalpur, P.S. Kashim Bazar, District- Munger.

Versus

1. STATE OF BIHAR

2. The Superintendent of Police, Munger.

3. The Officer Incharge, Kashim Bazar P.S., Munger.

4. Shri Jaidev Prasad Sharma s/o late Sakhi Chandra Mistri.

5. Shri Vinit Kumar Sharma s/0 Shri Jaidev Prasad Sharma.

6. ShriGopal Swaroop s/o Shri Sagar Sharma.

All are residents of Mohalla- Chuabagh, P.S.Kashim Bazar ,

District- Munger.

-----------

3

8.12.2009

The present application has been filed by the alleged

victim girl wherein she has complained that on false FIR, as lodged

by her brother being Kashim Bazar P.S.Case no. 28 of 2009 under

Section 366A IPC not only she is being harassed by the police but her

husband and their relations are being harassed. She states that she is

a major and out of her free will had married Anuj Kumar Yadav. The

two belongs very two different communities and as such her

marriage was not acceptable to her parents and her relations, which

has led to instituting this false case. She was then presented while she

was with her husband and brought to the Court and made to depose,

which deposition was recorded by Judicial Magistrate, 1^st class,

Munger. She made serious allegation about the manner in which her

deposition has been recorded.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has produced before

this Court a certified copy of the said case, which clearly shows that

immediately after the so called statement that was recorded u/s 164

2

Cr.P.C., before the Judicial Magistrate himself, she wrote on the order

sheet that she wants to go back to her husband. This is serious

contradiction with the statement as recorded. This Court had called for

an explanation from the Judicial Magistrate, who has sent his

explanation that what is recorded in the statement u/s 164 Cr. P.C. is

correctly and duly recorded and it is after seeing the same, the

petitioner had signed it. I have no reason to disbelieve that but what

is recorded in the statement is correct and true then that shows a total

insensitivity on the part of the judicial officers apart from police,

who are connected with this case that includes the learned Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Munger and Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Mishra,

Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Munger. In the statement, as recorded,

the Magistrate himself has assessed the age of victim girl to be 27

years. The girl has deposed her age to be 25 years. That itself should

have led the Chief Judicial Magistrate and the Magistrate concerned

to order for closure of the case as a false case and order for institution

of proceedings against the informant.

Regrettably, the FIR having been lodged for allegedly

kidnapping a minor girl, the police detained the girl. She was

produced in Court and the Court assessed her age to be 27 years. She

was then tortured and tormented and was made to face a Medical

Board, which also recommends that she is between twenty two and

twenty three years, yet there is a battle taken up for her custody when

she wants to live with her husband. The insensitivity of the Court that

the Court got involved in this litigation instead of relalizing that on

3

age being so determined, the very basis for FIR vanished into thin air.

To the contrary, the FIR became a totally false information given to

the police and deliberately. So the icing of the cake is that the case

is supervised by high police officials who have seen the medical

report still they found enough materials of filing chargesheet u/s

366A IPC .To remin