The Delhi High Court granted bail to a 23-year-old man who was being tried under the POCSO Act for his consensual physical relationship with a teen girl and said that putting a “young boy” in the company of hardened criminals will do more harm than good.
Justice Vikas Mahajan observed that the girl, a little over 17 years at the time, had sufficient maturity and intellectual capacity, and was prima facie in a consensual romantic relationship with the accused. The physical relationship between them was of their own free will, he said.
The judge noted the high court in an earlier verdict had said that the intention of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) was to protect children below the age of 18 from sexual exploitation and it was never meant to criminalise consensual romantic relationship between young adults.
“The petitioner, currently around 23 years old, is already in custody since October 15, 2021. Keeping the petitioner in jail will not serve any useful purpose. Rather, subjecting the young boy to the company of hardened criminals would do more harm than good,” the court said.
“Accordingly, the petitioner is admitted to regular bail subject to his furnishing personal bond of Rs 20,000/- and a Surety Bond in the like amount subject to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/CMM/Duty Magistrate,” the court ordered.
In the present case, the FIR was registered at the instance of the girl who alleged that the accused, her neighbour, had befriended her and established a physical relationship with her on the pretext of marrying her.
The girl said she subsequently discovered that she was pregnant and her medical examination revealed that it was too late for an abortion.
In its order, the court recorded that the prosecutrix asserted in her statement that she never wanted to get a case registered against the petitioner but it seemed that the FIR was lodged by her “at the insistence of her family who were perhaps embarrassed after the discovery of prosecutrix’s pregnancy which had surpassed the stage of its termination”.
“This court is cognizant of the fact that the prosecutrix was a minor at the time of the incident but at the same time it cannot be overlooked that the prosecutrix was aged 17.5 years and was thus, of sufficient maturity and intellectual capacity. The petitioner at the relevant time was aged about 20 years,” it said.
The court observed that the object of judicial custody is to secure the presence of the accused during the trial which can be ensured by putting in place appropriate conditions.
The testimonies of the prosecutrix and her mother have already been recorded, therefore, there cannot be any apprehension about the material witnesses being influenced, it added.
The court asked the petitioner not to leave the city without permission and appear before the trial court whenever the case is taken up for hearing.
It also asked him to keep his mobile phone in working condition and not communicate with the witnesses or their families.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
Featured Video Of The Day
How Big Is The Chinese Propaganda Threat?