Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:42402-DB Court No. - 42 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5367 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sunita Kumari And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar Mishra,Vinay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri U.K. Mishra, Advocate, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no.4 and perused the record. 2. This writ petition has been filed praying to quash the first information report dated 26.02.2025 registered as Case Crime No.0053 of 2025, under Sections 87, 352, 351(2) of B.N.S., 2023, Police Station-Taraya Sujan, District-Kushi Nagar and not to arrest the petitioners pursuant to the said FIR. 3. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that as per Aadhar Card, the date of birth of petitioner no. 1 is 01.01.2003 and petitioner no. 2 is 22.02.2000 and both are major. He next contended that due to torture and harassment by respondent no.4, petitioner no.1 left her house and is residing in live-in relationship with petitioner no.2. He next contended that the petitioners belong to different religion and hence, their marriage could not be solemnized and they are in live-in relationship out of their own sweet will. 4. Per contra, learned AGA has resisted the relief and submitted that no authentic proof of age is appended with the writ petition and cognizable offence is made out against the petitioners. 5. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Suhani vs. State of U.P. reported in 2018 0 Supreme (SC) 1430 and judgment dated 18.7.2023 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1898 of 2023 (P. Yuvaprakash vs. State Rep. By Inspector of Police) and submits that in all such matters Hon'ble Apex Court has directed for age determination test of the girl. 6. In view thereof, we direct that the petitioner no.1-Sunita Kumari be produced before the Magistrate concerned, for recording her statement under section 183 B.N.S.S., 2023. It is made clear that the concerned Magistrate shall ensure that the statement of the girl is recorded without any kind of duress. Thereafter, she shall be brought before the Chief Medical Officer concerned by the I.O. of the case who shall constitute a panel of three doctors, for her age determination test (ossification test). Both these exercises must conclude within six weeks from today. 7. It is incumbent upon the petitioners to provide all necessary assistance to the Investigation Officer during investigation, however, the petitioners shall not be arrested during this period. 8. The arrest of the petitioners shall be subject to the 183 B.N.S.S., 2023 statement of the girl/petitioner no.1 and her age. 9. In the event, it is found that she has attained the age of majority and her 183 B.N.S.S, statement favours petitioner no.2, then the petitioners shall not be arrested till the submission of report by the police under section 193(3) B.N.S.S., 2023. If it is found otherwise, the procedure of law would follow against the petitioners and the protection given to the petitioners by this order, would automatically stand vacated. 10. With this observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 24.3.2025 Manish Himwan (Prashant Kumar,J.) (M.C. Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH HIMWAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad