A court in Delhi has granted bail to an individual accused in a case registered under the stringent Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, after noting that the minor girl had left her home willingly to marry him. The decision highlights the judicial scrutiny applied to cases where the relationship appears to be consensual and not exploitative in nature.
The Case Details and Court's Observations
The matter was heard by Additional Sessions Judge Rakesh Kumar Singh in the Tis Hazari Courts complex. The accused was arrested following a complaint by the girl's father. However, during the proceedings, the court examined the facts presented, including the statement of the minor girl recorded before a magistrate.
The judge observed that the girl, who was above 16 years of age, had left her parental home of her own volition to marry the accused. The court noted the absence of any allegations that the accused had enticed or forced the girl away. This element of consent and voluntary elopement became a pivotal factor in the bail consideration.
Judicial Reasoning for Granting Bail
In his order, ASJ Rakesh Kumar Singh emphasized the specific context of the case. He stated that the relationship between the accused and the prosecutrix did not appear to be exploitative. The court acknowledged that while the POCSO Act is a vital tool for protecting minors from sexual abuse, its application must be examined on a case-by-case basis.
The judge pointed out that the accused had no criminal history and was not a flight risk, which further supported the bail plea. The court imposed standard bail conditions, including that the accused must not tamper with evidence or influence any witnesses in the ongoing trial.
Broader Implications and Legal Context
This ruling adds to a growing body of judicial precedents where courts have distinguished between exploitative child sexual abuse and cases involving adolescent relationships or consensual elopement. The POCSO Act mandates strict punishment, but judges often exercise discretion in bail matters after evaluating the circumstances.
The decision underscores the judiciary's role in balancing the strict provisions of the law with the principles of justice and individual case facts. The trial in the main POCSO case will continue independently, and the grant of bail is not a judgment on the final merits of the case but an interim relief based on the presented factors.
Legal experts often debate the application of POCSO in consensual adolescent relationships, and this bail order reflects the nuanced approach sometimes adopted by courts. The final outcome will depend on the evidence presented during the full trial.
