Uttarakhand High Court
State vs Unknown on 18 June, 2025
Office Notes,
reports, orders or
proceedings or COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
SL. Date
directions and
No
Registrar's order
with Signatures
C528 No.749 of 2024
Hon'ble Ashish Naithani, J.
Mr. S.K. Mandal, learned counsel for the
Applicants.
2. Mr. Vipul Painuly, learned AGA assisted by
Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, learned Brief Holder for the
State.
3. Mr. Shobhit Batra, learned counsel for
respondent no.2.
4. Present application has been moved by the
Applicants-Nakul and Minakshi Saini under Section
528 of B.N.S.S. 2023 whereby they sought
quashing of Special Session Trial No.616 of 2023,
State vs. Nakul arising out of FIR No.225 of 2023
for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366-
A, 376 of IPC and 5/6 of POCSO Act, registered at
P.S. Kashipur pending in the court of
F.T.C./Additional Session Judge/Special Judge
POCSO, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants as well as
for private respondents make statement before this
Court that parties have come into the terms of
compromise as Applicant No.1-Nakul and
Applicant No.2-Minakshi Saini are now both major.
Since both the applicants got married after applicant
no.2 gave birth to a child. Respondent no.2-Smt.
Heerawati is mother of applicant no.2-Minakshi
Saini.
6. A statement has been made that the parties
have come into the terms of compromise and they
are living a happy married life.
7. In the present application the age of
Applicant No.2-Minakshi Saini is said to be 20
years.
8. Learned counsel for the State raises an
objection regarding compounding of the matter
with a statement that applicant no.2 is a girl child
against whom allegations were made for the offence
punishable under Section 363, 366A, 376 of IPC
and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act. Therefore,
applicant no.2 happens to be the victim, applicant
no.1-accused and respondent no.2-complainant,
who happens to be the mother of applicant no.2.
9. As per complaint, Applicant no.2-Minakshi
was taken by applicant no.1 in February 2023
whereas as per record it is 4th March 2023. As per
school records so far the date of birth of applicant
no.2 is stated to be 15.04.2006.
10. Learned counsel for the applicants stated that
the date of birth as mentioned in the certificate is
not correct and the certificate itself is not valid in
the eyes of law.
11. As per the Aadhar Card of the applicant no.2
her date of birth is mentioned as 10.03.2004,
accordingly, the applicant no.2 cannot be said to be
a minor.
12. Whatever age relating documents that are
being relied upon may it be Aadhar Card or the
class IXth certificate; prima facie cannot be said to
be as the certificate of birth.
13. Since there is no certificate of birth from the
Registrar/Municipality, who deals with death and
birth registration, the learned counsel for the
applicant is directed that a medical report in this
regard be furnished before this Court.
14. The medical of Applicant No.2-Minakshi
Saini shall be conducted by a panel of Medical
Officers amongst whom one should be an
Orthopedician, second should be a Dentist and third
should be a Physician and the said panel of doctors
should be assessed by the Chief Medical Officer of
the concerned Government Hospital.
15. Learned counsel for the applicants may get
the applicant no.1-Meenakshi Saini examined in the
light of this Court’s order.
16. List on 08.07.2025.
17. Interim order dated 02.05.2025 would
continue to operate till the next date of listing.
(Ashish Naithani, J.)
18.06.2025
Arti