Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

While granting bail to a 23-year-old boy in a Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) case arising from his consensual physical relationship with a minor girl, the Delhi High Court said that putting a "young boy" in the company of hardened criminals will do more harm than good to him.

Justice Vikas Mahajan observed that the minor girl, aged 17 years and a half at the relevant 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”, the court said in its order dated July 28.

The judge noted the high court had said in an earlier verdict that the intention of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) was to protect children below the age of 18 years from sexual exploitation and it was never meant to “criminalise consensual romantic relationship between young adults”.

The court observed, "The petitioner is in custody since October 15, 2021 and has clean antecedent...Keeping him 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".

“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 court said.

In the case, the FIR was registered at the instance of the girl alleging that the man established physical relationship with her on the pretext of marriage. In the order, the high court noted that it “appeared” from the girl’s statement recorded under the Code of Criminal Procedure that she never wanted to get the case registered against the man.

“However, it seems that the present FIR has been lodged…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,” Justice Mahajan said.

While granting bail to the boy, the court ordered, “I am satisfied that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of regular bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is admitted to regular bail subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- and a Surety Bond in the like amount subject to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/CMM/Duty Magistrate”.

The judge further clarified that the observations made hereinabove are only for the purpose of considering the bail application and the same shall not be deemed to be an expression of opinion on merits of the case.

Case Title: Sanjay Kumar v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.