Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Allahabad High Court recently denied bail to a man accused under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act for enticing away his minor sister-in-law. Court highlighted the gravity of his actions, which not only breached familial trust but also undermined the sanctity of marriage.

While denying any relief to the accused, the bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh said, "The applicant's actions have inflicted severe traumas upon the wife, shattering her trust and dignity, and have irreparably strained the relationship between two sisters".

Court stressed that a man's such behaviour disrupts not just the marital relationship but the broader family unit, leading to discord and instability.

The applicant, Devideen, sought bail under Section 439 of the CrPC while facing charges under multiple provisions of the Indian Penal Code, the POCSO Act, and the Dowry Prohibition Act. These charges stem from allegations of marital harassment, dowry demands, and the exploitation of his wife’s minor sister, aged 17.

According to the prosecution, the applicant had a history of abusive behavior toward his wife, who alleged that he harassed and assaulted her over dowry-related issues. Matters escalated after she gave birth to a girl, leading her to leave the matrimonial home.

The accused was also reported to have abducted his wife’s minor sister on two separate occasions. In February 2023, he allegedly enticed her away from her parental home, an act for which an FIR was filed, leading to his arrest and temporary imprisonment. Despite being released on bail, the applicant reportedly repeated the act in August 2023, attempting to take the minor to Prayagraj. The victim’s statement under Sections 161 and 164 of the CrPC, as well as her subsequent medical examination, supported the allegations.

Court emphasized that the victim, being a minor, could not legally consent to any such relationship. It underscored the severity of the applicant’s conduct, stating that it constituted a grave violation of familial and moral integrity. 

"The act of the applicant reflects a disregard for these foundational principles and for his responsibilities both as a husband and as a member of the family. Such conduct is unequivocally condemned by both the societal norms and the law," the bench said.

Further, referring to Section 29 of the POCSO Act, the court highlighted the presumption of guilt against the accused unless proven otherwise.

The defense argued that the FIR was delayed, the victim willingly accompanied the accused, and there was a financial dispute between the families. However, court rejected these contentions, citing the applicant’s criminal history and the serious nature of the allegations. It concluded that releasing the accused on bail would not serve the interests of justice.

In its order dated January 2, 2025, court made it clear that its observations pertain solely to the bail application and will not influence the trial's outcome.

Case Title: Devideen Vs State Of Up And 3 Others