Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:59473-DB Court No. - 43 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7679 of 2025 Petitioner :- Solochna And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kuldeep Tripathi,Shiv Shanker Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J. Hon'ble Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J. 1. Heard Sri Kuldeep Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Susheel Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the informant and Sri Rahul Asthana, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. This writ petition has been filed praying to quash the first information report dated 25.3.2025 registered as Case Crime No. 52 of 2025, under Sections 137(2) of B.N.S., P.S. Nagphani, District Moradabad 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 15.2.2003 and petitioner no. 2 is 1.1.1997 and both are major and have married with each other out of their own free will and as such no offence under Section 137(2) of B.N.S. is made out. It is also submitted that in support of the present petition joint affidavit has been filed and the marriage of the petitioners has already been registered. 4. Per contra, learned AGA on instructions submits that no authentic proof of age is appended with the writ petition and as per Class VI-VII school leaving certificate her date of birth is 1.4.2007. 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-Salochana be produced before the Magistrate concerned, for recording her statement under section 183 of B.N.S.S. and 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 on or before 31.5.2025 or 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 of B.N.S.S. statement of the girl and her age. 9. In the event, if it is found that she had attained the age of majority and her 183 of B.N.S.S. statement favours the petitioner no.2, then the petitioners shall not be arrested till the submission of report by the police under section 193(3) of B.N.S.S. OTHERWISE, the procedure of law would follow against the petitioners and the protection given to the petitioners would automatically stands vacated. 10. With this observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 22.4.2025 Lalit Shukla Digitally signed by :- LALIT KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad