[ad_1]
The Delhi High Court has granted bail to a 23-year-old man in a case falling under the ambit of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act). The case stems from his consensual physical relationship with a minor girl. The Court’s decision is underpinned by its apprehension that subjecting the man to the influences of seasoned criminals could prove detrimental rather than beneficial.
Justice Vikas Mahajan noted that a previous ruling by the high court had said that the fundamental purpose of the POCSO Act was to safeguard individuals under the age of 18 from sexual exploitation. The Act never intended to label consensual romantic connections between young adults as criminal in nature.
Justice Mahajan’s scrutiny revealed that the minor girl, at the time aged 17 and a half, exhibited a level of maturity and intellectual acumen indicative of her potential participation in a consensual romantic association with the accused. The judge categorically stated that the physical intimacy shared between the two was a product of their voluntary inclination.
“The petitioner, who is presently aged about 23 years, is already in custody since 15.10.2021. Keeping the petitioner in jail will not serve any useful purpose, rather subjecting young boy in the company of hardened criminals would do more harm than good to him,” PTI quoted the order as stating.
“This court is cognizant of the fact that the prosecutrix was minor at the time of incident but at the same time it cannot be overlooked that the prosecturix 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.
A First Information Report (FIR) was filed following the girl’s allegations. She asserted that the accused, her neighbour, had developed a friendship with her and engaged in a physical relationship, alluding to a future marriage.
Subsequently, the girl found herself pregnant, a circumstance revealed through her medical examination. However, the option of abortion was no longer viable due to the advanced stage of her pregnancy.
The court duly documented that the prosecutrix had expressed her unwillingness towards initiating legal action against the petitioner. Nonetheless, it appeared that the FIR was instituted, possibly under the insistence of her family. This might have been prompted by family pressure following the discovery of her pregnancy, which had progressed beyond a point where abortion was a feasible recourse.
(With PTI inputs)
Download The Mint News App to get Daily Market Updates.
Updated: 09 Aug 2023, 07:00 AM IST
[ad_2]
Source link