RESERVED ON 19.8.2025 DELIVERED ON 9.9.2025 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5106 of 2023 Court No. - 47 HON'BLE SIDDHARTH, J. Heard Sri Nitish Kumar Pandey Advocate holding brief of Sri Onkar Nath, learned counsel for the revisionist; Virendra Singh Patel, learned counsel for the informant; learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the trial court record. This criminal revision has been filed against the order dated 7.7.2023 passed by the Special Judge(POCSO Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Etawah allowing the criminal appeal of opposite party no.3 by which Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Additional Session Judge, Etawah illegally given the custody of respondent no.2 to the respondent no.3, Alok Kumar @ Vishnu in criminal appeal no. 59 of 2023 in case crime no. 457 of 2022 under sections 323,366,376,504,506 I.P.C. and section 17/18 POCSO Act P.S. Bakewar District Etawah. By the order dated 14.3.2023 application made by the opposite party no.2, before the Child Welfare Committee , Etawah praying that she may be permitted to go with her husband,respondent no.3, Alok Kumar @ Vishnu was rejected.She stated before the Child Welfare Committee that she does not wants to go with her father, mother and other family members. The Board decided to sent her to Government Women Observation Home, Swaroop Nagar Kanpur by order dated 14.3.2023. Appeal No. 59 of 2023 was preferred by the daughter of the Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Onkar Nath Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Virendra Singh Patel Ram Sewak .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) revisionist,opposite party no.2 and her husband, respondent no.3, Alok Kumar @ Vishnu stating that daughter of the revisionist is aged about 19 years. She has not studied in any educational institution and is labourer and her father is employed in the house of village Pradhan.She had married respondent no.3 on her sweet will and also pregnant by three months.Her school living certificate has been fabricated showing her date of birth 4.7.2008, when as per her ossification test report she is aged about 18years.She further stated that she wants to go with her husband. Appellate court found that at the time of hearing of the appeal opposite party no.2, victim, was pregnant by five months. In her statements recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. she claimed that she has married opposite party no.3 on her sweet will and wants to live with him.The appellate court disbelieved the date of birth mentioned in class-IV educational certificate of opposite party no.2 produced before the court. In view of her ossification test report wherein finding was recorded that her age was recorded as 18 years, appellate court allowed the appeal and directed the respondent no.2, daughter of the revisionist, to go with respondent no.3, Alok Kumar @ Vishnu, her husband. At the time of hearing of this revision more than two years have passed since order dated 7.7.2023.Keeping in view totality of facts and circumstances of the case and consenting relationship with respondent nos.2 and 3, the order of the appellate court seems to be justified and does not calls for any interference. The revision is accordingly dismissed. Office is directed to return the trial court record to the trial court within one week. September 9, 2025 Atul kr. sri. CRLR No. 5106 of 2023 2 (Siddharth,J.) Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad