By Rajesh Pandey
While granting bail to a person, who eloped with an alleged minor girl and later married with her, the Allahabad High Court has expressed concern over the frequent application of the protection of children from sexual offences (POCSO) Act on adolescents particularly in consensual romantic relationships between teenage persons.
“While the POSCO Act’s primary objective is to protect children under the age of majority (18) from sexual exploitation, there are cases where it has been misused, particularly in consensual romantic relationships between teenage persons”, added the court.
Elaborating the aspect of purpose and misuse of this Act, the court said, “The challenge lies in distinguishing between genuine cases of exploitation and those involving consensual relationships. This requires a nuanced approach and careful judicial consideration to ensure justice is served appropriatel”.
While granting bail to one Satish alias Chand, Justice Krishan Pahal said, “Admittedly, the age of the victim is 18 years as per the ossification test report. The Supreme Court in Jaya Mala vs. State of J & K 1982 and in another case has opined that the radiologist cannot predict the correct date of birth rather there is a long margin of 1 to 2 years on either side”.
As per prosecution story, it is alleged that the applicant had enticed away the minor daughter of the informant on June 13, 2023. Subsequently, an FIR was lodged against him under sections – 363 (kidnapping), 366 (kidnapping and abducting a woman to compel her marriage or to cause her defilement), 376 (rape) of Indan Penal Code (IPC) and 5(J)2/6 POCSO Act at police station- Barahaj of Deoria district.
The applicant was arrested and has been languishing in jail since January 5, 2024.
During the court proceedings, the counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about four days and there is no proper explanation of the said delay caused. The victim is a consenting party which is but evident from her statement recorded under section 164 criminal procedure code (CrPC) and as per her own statement she was 18 years old.
It was further argued that the victim and applicant were madly in love with each other and out of fear of their parents had eloped and solemnized their marriage at a temple which is not registered. The applicant and the victim belong to the same village and were neighbours.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by counsel for the parties, the evidence on record and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the court in its order dated July 3 granted bail to the applicant.
