Shankarpally police are facing allegations that they ignored government documents showing a woman was an adult and arrested her husband under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, while the police maintain that records indicated she was a minor.
The allegations were made by the woman in a video circulated on social media on Friday. She claimed that she had submitted her Aadhaar card and other government-issued documents to establish her age after police treated her as a minor. She also alleged that she had married the man of her own free will.
According to the report, the woman further alleged that police pressured her and her parents to undergo a medical examination despite their objections. She claimed that officers threatened to register criminal cases against her parents and send them to jail.
Shankarpally police denied the allegations and said a case had been registered on October 12 following a complaint from the woman’s father. Police said the father suspected that his daughter had been kidnapped, prompting the registration of the case.
The police said the woman’s statement was recorded at the Bharosa Centre, a facility used for assisting women and children in cases involving violence, abuse and related offences. They also said her Class X memorandum and other documents had been verified.
The two accounts differ on the central question of age. The woman says Aadhaar and other official documents established that she was an adult, while police said the available records indicated that she was a minor. The report does not provide the documents themselves, the woman’s exact age, the contents of the police case or the outcome of any court proceedings.
The dispute highlights the importance of accurate age determination in cases registered under the POCSO Act. The law applies to offences involving children, making the verification of age a central procedural issue. In this case, the woman’s allegation is that documents supporting her claim were not accepted, while the police say they relied on verified educational and other records.
The allegations also raise questions about how families and individuals are treated during investigations involving suspected kidnapping, voluntary relationships and possible child-protection offences. The police account indicates that the initial case followed a parental complaint, while the woman’s account presents the matter as a marriage entered into willingly and followed by pressure from investigators.
No independent finding on the competing claims is included in the supplied report. The police denial and the woman’s allegations therefore remain the two documented positions available in the case. Further clarity would depend on the records considered by investigators, the woman’s formal statement and any directions or findings from the courts.
Shankarpally police have not, according to the report, announced any separate action regarding the allegations about age documents, medical examination or threats against the woman’s parents. The case remains centred on the verification of the woman’s age and the investigation arising from her father’s complaint.
