MAHESH KUMAR v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
This bail application was filed by the accused in a case registered against him for offences punishable under Section 363 IPC (Punishment for kidnapping), Section 376 IPC (Punishment for rape) and Section 6 POCSO (Punishment for aggravated penetrative sexual assault).
The girl had stated to the police that she had consensually eloped with the boy.
She was 7 weeks pregnant and her pregnancy was terminated as per law. DNA report indicated that the accused was responsible for pregnancy.
The accused contented it that both the accused and the girl were in relationship and on the suggestion of the girl only they had eloped. The girl had admitted that she had suggested to elope.
Also, she had not supported the case of the prosecution. She also stated her age was 18 at that time. However, her school record didn’t support her claim. However, the prosecution alleged that she was only 16 at that time and her consent was no value as per law.
All through-out, she kept consistent to her statement that she had on her own went with the accused, as she had feelings for him. She further shared that she had told her age to be 18 to the accused. The accused wants to marry her once she turns 18 when he came to know about her real age. She further stated that she herself had suggested to get pregnant as soon as possible so that her family will accept their relationship.
The court noted that it was a teenage love story. Both wanted to marry each other.
The girl was consistent in her statement that she had fallen for him. The accused is not a criminal but was in love with her and out of his love, he agreed to what she said.
The court could not ascertain any criminal intention on the part of the accused.
The court agreed that the consent of the minor is illegal as per law, but in the present case, the court could not brand him as an accused. However, the court cautioned that all such cases would not be judged in the line of this order.
Court, in para 11 of the order, cautiously noted that in cases like the present one, courts are not handling criminals but teenage lovers. Bar on the age of consent is beyond their comprehension. Courts cannot control the teenage psychology and adolescent love. The courts should exercise utmost care when granting or rejecting bail applications in such cases.
Court remarked that teenagers are under the influence of the romantic culture perpetrated by the movies and the novels. Hence, such relationships should be judged on the basis of their real-life circumstances to ascertain their actions.
In numerous cases, they want to marry and live with each other.
The court admitted that it is difficult for it to send the accused to the jail and keep them with dreaded criminals. Doing so would be a travesty to justice and will have adverse effect on their future.
Court noted that in such cases, both the teenagers, being unaware of the age of consent, are sent to jails. This affects them and their future negatively. Court made it clear by a cautionary note that courts should decide such cases based on the facts and circumstances. Court, eventually granted bail to the boy as per the facts and circumstances of the present case, her age is not yet clear, based on the consistency in her statements, and due to the absence of any threat and inducement.