MP High Court Asks DGP To Consider Action Against Cop, School Principal For Suppressing Minor Girl's Age

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed the Director General of Police to decide whether any action should be taken against a cop and the Principal of a school for allegedly creating doubt over the age of a minor girl, which helped the accused who had eloped with the girl to secure an acquittal in a criminal case. [2026 LiveLaw (MP) 262]The division bench of Justice GS Ahluwalia and Justice Anuradha Shukla observed that despite multiple official documents showing the girl's date of birth as February 10, 2009, the investigating officer and school principal suppressed crucial material and created confusion about her age. The bench noted, "Therefore, it is clear that in all the documents, the date of birth of corpus is mentioned as 10.02.2009, but prosecution deliberately created a situation where the Court was compelled to give a finding that prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that corpus was minor on the date of offence". Expressing concern over the conduct of officials, the court remarked that while the State government is making every effort to protect the dignity and safety of girls, such conduct by police officers in cases involving minor girls cannot be ignored. Accordingly, the bench directed;"Let a copy of this order be sent to Director General of Police to take a decision as to whether any action is to be taken against Principal, Naveen Vidhya Mandir Higher Secondary School, Vindhyachal Colony, Guna or not because under Section 94 of the JJC Act, a certificate issued by the school is one of the authentic documents to prove date of birth of juvenile. Similarly, Director General of Police is also directed to take a decision as to whether he would like to take any action against Investigating Officer who has created as hostile situation to facilitate the accused, or not?" A writ of habeas corpus was filed by the petitioner alleging that he had eloped with a girl, who was a minor at the time, and a criminal case was registered against him. Again, the petitioner eloped with the corpus, and he was prosecuted. Upon her production, the corpus refused to go along with her parents, but since she was a minor, she was allowed to stay at the One Stop Centre in Guna. However, a certificate issued by the Principal of Naveen Vidya Mandir Higher Secondary School, Vindhyachal Colony, Guna, was part of the chargesheet, and the trial court acquitted the petitioner on the ground that the prosecution failed to establish that the corpus was a minor at the time. It was submitted that since the corpus is major, she cannot continue her stay at One Stop Centre and therefore he filed the present petition. When the corpus appeared before the High Court, she stated her desire to reside with the petitioner. However, her parents made a categorical statement that she was a minor, claiming her birth date to be February 10, 2009. Certain documents, including the State certificate issued under Ladli Laxmi Yojana, and by the Department of Planning, Economics and Statistics and by Municipal Council, show her date of birth as 10.02.2009. It was submitted that the mother of the corpus had given these documents to the police, who did not file the same with the chargesheet. Accordingly, the Town Inspector was directed to produce the case diary as well as the original admission register of Corpus's school. The High Court had also directed the State counsel to seize the school register, which was complied with. Upon production of the case diary as well as two admission registers of the school, the court noted that in one admission register her date was registered as 10.02.2009, but this was registered in September 2015 in another register titled Amended Register. The court noted that the School had registered 2009 as her birth year in 2015 after the parents provided an Aadhar Card and a birth certificate. Before 2015, the school recorded her date of birth from 10.05.2008 to 10.02.2009. The court noted that the School had not provided a copy of the document or the amended admission showing her birthdate as 10.02.2009. The court noted that even the certificate issued by the Principal was based on a previous entry and not on the basis of an amended entry. The bench, examining the case diary, noted that the Investigating Officer did not attempt to collect educational documents of the corpus from her parents. The court remarked, "Why Police did not try to collect the documents from parents is a mystery, but according to mother of corpus, the educational documents of corpus were provided to the Police in which date of birth of corpus was mentioned as 10.02.2009". Under said circumstances, the court observed that the Investigating officer as well as the Principal "played fraud on the court" by suppressing material documents with "solitary intention" to facilitate the accused by raising doubts over the age of the corpus. For the evidence, the court held that the corpus's date of birth in all the documents is mentioned as...

MP High Court Asks DGP To Consider Action Against Cop, School Principal For Suppressing Minor Girl's Age

Jayanti Pahwa

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Jayanti Pahwa

MP High Court Asks DGP To Consider Action Against Cop, School Principal For Suppressing Minor Girl's Age

Jayanti Pahwa

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Jayanti Pahwa

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers