Settlement or living together as husband and wife cannot quash POCSO case of minor forced to marry man 20 years older: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court held that quashing the FIR would legitimise child marriage and the exploitation of a minor.
The Delhi High Court held that quashing the FIR would legitimise child marriage and the exploitation of a minor.
The incident pertains to the year 2009, there was intimacy between the appellant and the prosecutrix, which could not be recognized due to the prosecutrix being minor. Now, both the appellant and the prosecutrix are settled in their respective married lives, and the prosecutrix has also expressed her desire not to contest the case.
The Court observed that the allegations do not merely portray an assault; they prima facie depict an attempt to commit rape, interrupted not by any voluntary desistance on the part of the accused but by the relentless resistance offered by the victim herself.
It was alleged by the applicant that the social website named “Tinder app” is not a matrimonial site, but is a popular site among youngsters, and the said website is meant for making friends.
The Bombay High Court noted that since the FIR was registered under Section 376 IPC without prima facie examination of the allegations and given the unexplained delay and contradictions in the victim’s statements, the prosecution case lacked legal foundation and the conviction was liable to be set aside.
“Merely on the presence of semen on the pant of the victim and on the basis of the ocular evidence that some ‘bad work’ was done, it cannot be presumed that penetrative sexual assault to some extent was committed upon her.”
“In the present case, the absence of documentary proof establishing the seizure and custody of the alleged forensic article creates a reasonable doubt as to the authorship of the sexual act.”
“The sine qua non of the offence of rape is penetration, and not ejaculation. Ejaculation without penetration constitutes an attempt to commit rape and not actual rape.”
“The accused was only 20 years of age at the time when the offence took place, as reflected in the FIR, and was not released on bail even during Covid-19.”
“The findings returned by the Court of Inquiry shall be in the nature of a preliminary report which shall facilitate the BSF authorities to decide as to whether the disciplinary proceedings against the delinquent are required to be initiated or not.”
“The consent given by the prosecutrix to sexual intercourse with a person with whom she is deeply in love with, on a promise that he would marry her, cannot be considered to be given under a misconception of fact.”
“The Court cannot act as a mere post office or mouthpiece of the prosecution; it is required to apply its judicial mind to the material placed on record before it.”
“To convict the accused under Section 363 IPC, two things are to be established beyond reasonable doubt, one that she was below the age of 18 years and other would be that she was taken away from her lawful guardianship without consent of the guardians.”
“The Board shall conduct the preliminary assessment regarding the mental and physical capacity of the child to commit the crime, his ability to understand the consequences of the offence and the circumstances in which the crime was allegedly committed.”
The Court found that it had been proved that the victim was forcibly kidnapped by the convict with the intention to marry and have intercourse with her. He not only outraged her modesty but also attempted to rape her by undressing her but failed due to her protest.
“If the Courts started accepting that a major boy of age 25 years on-wards took away the girl who was a minor and then came with the defence of adolescent love, then it would not be a good sign from the legal point of view, because particular Acts were legislated with certain aims and objects.”
“The failure to provide documents to the accused in a language in which the accused could not read, would definitely scuttle the chances for the accused to instruct and assist his counsel in canvassing the defence on his behalf.”
“In Indian societal norms, the matters relating to sexual assault in large number of cases are not being reported by women timely… The possibility of accused taking benefit of the situation… cannot be ruled out.”
“The consent of the complainant as defined under section 90 IPC cannot be said to have been obtained under a misconception of fact. There is no material to substantiate “inducement or misrepresentation” on the part of the accused to secure consent for sexual relations without having any intention of fulfilling said promise”.
“Any compromise or settlement with respect to the offence of rape, against the honour of a woman, which shakes the very core of her life and tantamounts to a serious blow to her supreme honour, offending both, her esteem and dignity, is not acceptable to this Court.”