The court granted pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, an 18-year-old boy, who was in a romantic relationship with a 17-year-10-month-old girl and had consensual sex, considering the peculiar facts of the case and the survivor's statement about their relationship and consent.

Dated this the 4th day of June, 2024 As unveiled from the peculiar facts of this case, the petitioner, a boy aged 18 years and the survivor, a girl of 17 years and ten months were in a romantic relationship and indulged in consensual sex. This resulted in a crime being registered against the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 363 , 354 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 (1) and 3 (a) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act .

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that even in her statement before the police, the survivor girl had categorically stated about her romantic relationship with the petitioner and an instance of consensual sex, which they had indulged in under the hope that knowledge about the physical intimacy may prompt the families to agree for their marriage in future. Learned Counsel contended that merely because the boy had crossed the age of 18 years, he should not be penalised, particularly when the girl was about to reach 18 years of age.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that if the courts show leniency in cases of this nature, that will send a wrong message to the society. According to the Public Prosecutor, being a major, the petitioner was bound to know the consequences of his action.

4. As discussed earlier, the survivor has categorically stated about her intimacy with the petitioner and their sexual escapade. She has also stated about having indulged in consensual sex under the hope that the knowledge about their physical relationship may scale down the objection from their families. The question therefore is whether the petitioner should be arrested, remanded and subjected to custodial interrogation in a case of this nature. No doubt, even though the survivor was only marginally below 18 years of age at the relevant time, she is a child in the eye of law and therefore ineligible to give consent. At the same time, the fact that the petitioner had attained 18 years of age only a month before the relevant date cannot also be ignored. On consideration of these relevant factors, I find the petitioner to be entitled for pre-arrest bail.

The Bail Application is accordingly allowed with the following conditions;

(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail, in the event of his arrest, on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/ investigating officer, as the case may be.

(ii) The petitioner shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting himself to the deemed police custody for discovery, if any, as and when demanded.

(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until further orders. He shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.

(v) The petitioner shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

(vi) The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.

(vii) The application, if any, for deletion/modification of bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of violating the bail conditions shall be filed at the jurisdictional court.