The Gujarat High Court quashed a kidnapping and POCSO case against a man after noting that this was a case of "adolescent love" wherein the girl was in relationship with the accused and had voluntarily left her parents home as her father was pressuring her to marry someone else. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 276]

The court was hearing a man's plea seeking quashing of an FIR under Sections 363 (Punishment for Kidnapping) and 366 (Compelling Marriage or Illicit Intercourse) of the IPC and Section 18(Punishment for Attempt to Commit an Offence) POCSO Act.

After considering the arguments, perusing the FIR and the affidavit of the girl supporting the accused, Justice PM Raval in his order observed:

"...this is a case of adolescence love, wherein the victim herself voluntarily left the house of the parents (complainant father) without there being any threat, coercion or allurement and also considering the fact that the victim had a love affair with the present petitioner and, as per the affidavit, the father of the victim was pressuring her to get married to some other person, she left the house of the father voluntarily. Under such circumstances, no case under Sections 363 and 366 of the IPC and Section 18 of the POCSO Act is made out"

The complainant father claimed that his daughter born on 22.08.1999, went to college on 22.06.2017 but did not come back in the evening. When he inquired, he found that the petitioner was also not there at his residence. The complainant also came to know that the certifcates of his daughter were also missing, after which he lodged a complaint against the petitioner.

The petitioner's counsel argued that the petitioner and the complainant's daughter were in love wherein the daughter had voluntarily accompanied the petitioner and got married after attaining the age of majority on 06.09.2017. It was submitted that her birthday is on 22.08.1999 and the alleged date of offence is 22.06.2017; thus, she was aged 17 years and 10 months at the time of offence.

The petitioner argued, that this was a case of a love affair and, wherein the complainant's daughter had voluntarily left her parent's house and thus no role can be attributed to the petitioner under Sections 363 and 366 of the IPC, inasmuch as the victim herself had executed the Affidavit in support of the petitioner, stating that she had a love affair with him and her father was pressuring her to get married to someone else which she did not agree to. Thus, the girl had said, that she left the her parent's house of her "own sweet will" and had taken shelter at her friend's house and after attaining the age of majority she had married the present petitioner.

The FIR was quashed.