The Delhi High Court has reiterated that in cases registered under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, the question of whether the minor consented to a physical relationship has no legal significance. The Court made this observation while denying bail to an accused who claimed that the alleged sexual act was consensual and that he and the minor were in a romantic relationship. The Court held that once the survivor is below 18 years of age, any suggestion of consent is legally meaningless because the POCSO Act creates an absolute presumption that a child cannot give valid consent for sexual activities.
The case arose when the accused sought bail by arguing that the girl had voluntarily accompanied him and that their relationship was consensual. He also attempted to assert that he believed the girl to be an adult. However, the High Court noted that the girl’s school records were sufficient to confirm her age as below 18. In such circumstances, the law leaves no room for interpreting the relationship as consensual. The Court emphasized that the statutory scheme of POCSO is designed to shield minors from sexual exploitation regardless of their subjective willingness or emotional involvement with the accused.
The Court acknowledged that in modern social contexts, many teenagers engage in romantic relationships, and such situations may sometimes lead to criminal prosecutions under POCSO. However, it clarified that the judiciary cannot dilute or override the explicit provisions of the Act. The law is unambiguous: any sexual act involving an individual below 18 years of age is a criminal offence, no matter the circumstances or the intention of the parties involved. The notion of consent, therefore, cannot act as a mitigating factor or a defence during prosecution.
The Court also observed that whether the relationship was exploitative or affectionate is a matter to be considered during trial, but it cannot be a ground for bail when the statute itself prescribes strict implications. Furthermore, allegations under POCSO carry serious consequences due to the gravity of offences covered under the Act, which aim to safeguard minors from all forms of sexual abuse.
While some judicial comments in earlier cases have acknowledged the nuanced realities of adolescent relationships and suggested the need for evolving legal frameworks, the Court stressed that until any legislative amendment is made, the judiciary must apply the law in its current form. Under the existing statutory structure, the age of the survivor is the determining factor, and minors are deemed incapable of giving lawful consent to sexual acts.
In conclusion, the Delhi High Court reaffirmed the strict position adopted by the POCSO Act: consent from a minor holds no legal validity, and any claim of consensual relationship cannot aid the accused in seeking bail or relief. The ruling underscores the Act’s child-centric approach and the absolute nature of the protections granted to minors under the law.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.