POCSO Act Not Meant To Criminalise Adolescents' Romantic Bond, Consensual Relation A Consideration To Grant Bail: Allahabad HC
The Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act was formulated to protect children under the age of 18 years from sexual exploitation and it was never meant to criminalise consensual romantic relationships between adolescents, the Allahabad High Court recently observed. Noting that nowadays, more often than not, the Act has become a tool for their exploitation, the bench...
The Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act was formulated to protect children under the age of 18 years from sexual exploitation and it was never meant to criminalise consensual romantic relationships between adolescents, the Allahabad High Court recently observed.
Noting that nowadays, more often than not, the Act has become a tool for their exploitation, the bench of Justice Krishan Pahal stressed that the fact of consensual relationship borne out of love should be of consideration while granting bail in such cases.
In this regard, the Court further opined that it would amount to the perversity of justice if the statement of the victim in such cases is ignored and the accused is left to suffer behind in jail.
These observations were made by the single judge while granting bail to an Accused booked under Sections 363, 366 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act for allegedly enticing away a 15-year-old girl.
Before the Court, the Counsel for the accused argued that the applicant had been falsely implicated in the present case to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him.
Regarding the age of the victim, he submitted that her school leaving certificate from a local school cannot be taken into consideration and that no ossification test of the girl had been conducted.
It was further stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant and he has been languishing in jail since May 2023.
Against the backdrop of these submissions, keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding the complicity of the accused, the statement of the victim, larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the Court granted bail to the accused.
Case Title: Mrigraj Gautam @ Rippu vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45007 of 2023]
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 409