The statement was made by the court when it granted anticipatory bail to an accused person who had been arrested by the Fatehgarh Sahib Police on charges of kidnapping a 17-year-old girl and forcing her into marriage.

According to a recent ruling by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the accused cannot be prosecuted for kidnapping if the minor, who is of the "age of discretion," voluntarily leaves her parents' home with them.

When giving anticipatory bail to an accused person who had been charged by the Fatehgarh Sahib Police with kidnapping a 17-year-old girl with the intention of forcing her into marriage, Justice Manisha Batra made this statement.

According to the Court, it is well-established legislation that any decision regarding the "taking" of a juvenile from her legal guardianship must take into account all relevant factors, including the girl's maturity and mental competence, which allow her to make her own decisions.

It further stated that the accused's actions may only be seen as "facilitating the fulfillment of the prosecutrix's desire" when the girl voluntarily leaves her father's or guardian's home and goes with him.

Judge Batra stated, "It does not amount to "taking" in the sense of the definition of kidnapping under Section 361 of IPC and does not fall short of an inducement to the prosecutrix to slip out of keeping of her lawful guardian."

The Court went on to state that it is a well-established legal principle that the accused must have actively contributed to the minor's departure from the care of her legal guardian.

"The accused cannot be charged with the crime of kidnapping if the minor, who is of legal age, freely leaves her parents' home and goes with the accused."

In the current case, the father of the daughter filed a complaint, which led to the accused's booking in January of this year.

According to the accused, he was wrongfully accused in the case. He said that although her family was against it, he was in a relationship with the girl, and they intended to get married.

The girl, a Class XII student, told the court in her statement obtained under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that she had chosen to leave her home on her own.

The Court came to the conclusion that she had not given the petitioner any credit for leaving her home.

The girl was 17 years and 4 months old when the Court granted the accused relief, reasoning that she was of the age of discretion and close to becoming a major.

The Court stated that the issue of whether or not there was "a case for kidnapping by way of enticing her to marry with the petitioner or force or seduce her to illicit intercourse has been made out" may be resolved at the trial given this context.

As a result, the Court declared that neither the accused's custodial questioning nor any form of recovery was necessary in this case.

Thus, it ordered the accused to cooperate with the inquiry and granted him pre-arrest bail.