16-Yr-Old's Consent Immaterial: Delhi High Court Denies Bail To 23-Yr-Old Married Man, Says Facts Specially Disentitle Him From Bail In POCSO Case

Reiterating that a minor's consent is immaterial in the eyes of law, the Delhi High Court recently denied bail to a 23-year-old man in a POCSO case, who is accused of allegedly raping a 16-year-old minor, observing that his age and the fact that he was already married, disentitle him from getting bail.Justice Jasmeet Singh also took note of the submission that the accused had got date of birth of the complainant changed in the Aadhaar card to show her as major."The conduct of the applicant of getting the date of birth changed in the Aadhar card of the complainant is a serious offence. It seems that the applicant wanted to take advantage by getting the Date of Birth on the Aadhar Card changed so that when the applicant established physical relationship with the complainant, she was not a minor," the court said.The court made the observations while dismissing the bail application of the accused in a case registered initially under Section 363 IPC in 2019. The girl's father had filed a missing person complaint. The minor was later traced and rescued from Sambhal district of Uttar Pradesh. She was found in the company of the applicant.In her statement under Section 164 CrPC, she said that the applicant is her boyfriend and she stayed with him for about one and a half month. She further stated that she established physical relationship with him with her consent. She also said she wants to stay with him. On the basis of her statement, Sections 366/376 IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act were added to the FIR.The counsel representing the accused argued that in view of the statement, the accused must be granted bail. The court was told he has been in custody since 2019 and chargesheet has already been filed.The counsel representing the victim submitted that she has been informed that it was the applicant who took her to the SDM and got her date of birth changed from 2002 to 2000 "only for the purpose of showing that [on] the date of the establishing physical relationship she was a minor". Dismissing the bail application, the court said:"The consent of the minor at the age of 16 years, specially, when the applicant was 23 years old and already married also disentitles the applicant for grant of bail. Consent of a minor is no consent in the eyes of law."Title: Javed vs State NCT Of DelhiCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 1134Click Here To Read/Download Order

16-Yr-Old's Consent Immaterial: Delhi High Court Denies Bail To 23-Yr-Old Married Man, Says Facts Specially Disentitle Him From Bail In POCSO Case

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags