A bail application was filed for a case made out against the accused on the allegations of kidnapping under IPC and penetrative sexual assault on a minor under Section 4 of the POCSO Act.
The mother of the victim had lodged the FIR under Sections 363 and 367 of IPC based on her suspicion that some persons had kidnapped the minor girl. However, the girl was traced soon.
She admitted to leaving her home and staying with her friend for 2-3 days. It scared her to return as she had not informed her parents, so choose to stay out only. While out, she alleged that the accused forcefully made sexual relations with her after calling her to a nearby location. He again made sexual relations with her a few days later.
The court, after going through the arguments of both parties and after going through the records, the court stated that it admits that the victim is a child within the definition given under POCSO Act. The mother of the victim, being the first informant, admitted that the relationship between the accused and the victim was consensual.
The court highlighted that the legislature has brought the POCSO Act into existence to safeguard children from sexual abuse and it provides for toughest punishment for the perpetrators of the crime. But, they have not brought it into existence to punish people for being in consensual relationships and tagging them as criminals.
The court noted that the accused has been in jail for in excess of 8 weeks and the trial is yet to begin. Given the huge pendency of the cases, there is high uncertainty that the trial will begin soon. Also, if he will stay in custody, there are high chances that he will come in close contact with the hardened criminals and that will not be good for him.
Source: Imran Iqbal Shaikh vs The State of Maharashtra, Bail Application no. 997 of 2022