Back
Young Age and Romantic Relationship Are for POCSO :
The has ruled that the young age of an accused and a minor victim, along with evidence of an intimate romantic relationship, can serve as when considering in cases under the . Justice Mini Pushkarna granted to a 20-year-old man who had been in custody for over three years on allegations of sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl.
The Case: A Love Affair Turned Legal Battle
The applicant, Vicky (alias Vikky), was arrested on in connection with FIR No. 381/2023 registered at . The FIR was initially filed on a missing complaint by the victim’s father on , after his daughter failed to return from school. She was traced on and gave a statement under stating she had left home voluntarily after a scolding and had no complaint against anyone. However, the next day she alleged that the applicant had kept her against her will and sexually assaulted her.
The victim, aged 14 years and 8 months at the time of the incident, and the applicant, aged 20 years and 4 months, were known to each other for about eight months. The investigation revealed that the victim had posted multiple photographs with the applicant on Instagram, expressing her love for him in intimate posts.
Arguments from Both Sides
The applicant’s counsel, , argued that the victim’s initial statement contradicted her later allegations, and that no intoxicants were found in her blood during medical examination. He highlighted the applicant’s young age, lack of , and the fact that he had already spent more than three years in custody. The counsel also pointed out that the trial was likely to take time, with only two of the 19 prosecution witnesses examined so far.
Opposing the , the Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and the standing counsel for the victim stressed the gravity of the offences, noting that . The prosecution argued that the victim’s supplementary statement clearly described the assault, and that DNA evidence from a blanket recovered at the scene matched the applicant.
Legal Analysis: Weighing
The court examined the inconsistencies in the victim’s statements and the documentary evidence of a romantic relationship. Relying on the principles laid down in Praduman Versus State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Another (2021 SCC OnLine Del 4620) and , the court noted that while consensual sex with a minor is not legally valid consent, the circumstances of the relationship must be considered in decisions.
Justice Pushkarna observed that the young age of both parties, the absence of any , the long period of custody, and the slow progress of trial all tilted the balance in favour of granting . The court also noted that the applicant and victim do not reside in the same locality, reducing the risk of interference.
Key Observations from the Bench
In her oral order, Justice Pushkarna made several crucial observations:
"The Court cannot ignore the young age of both the applicant as well as the victim. The documents on record show the intimate and romantic relationship between the applicant and the victim."
"Further, in her initial statement the victim stated in categorical terms that she had left the house on her own accord and that she did not want to make any complaint against anyone. These facts cannot be disregarded and serve as which tilts the balance towards grant of to the applicant."
The court also noted the discrepancy in the victim’s statements, observing that she gave different versions on different dates.
The Court's Decision and Conditions
Allowing the third regular application filed under , the court directed the applicant to be released on furnishing a of ₹30,000 with one of the like amount. The court imposed several conditions: the applicant must appear before the trial court on every hearing date, provide his permanent and current address to the investigating officer, keep his mobile number operational, report to the jurisdictional police station every Monday at 9 AM, and refrain from or committing any offence.
The court clarified that its observations were limited to the decision and would not influence the merits of the trial. The order was communicated electronically to the concerned jail superintendent for compliance.
This ruling adds to a growing body of case law where courts have considered the nature of the relationship and the age of the accused as relevant factors in POCSO matters, particularly when the relationship appears to have been consensual in fact, even if not in law.
