Teenage Love & Related Offences Falls In ‘Legal Grey Area’; It's Debatable If That Can Be Categorised As Offence: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court while, granting bail to a 22 year old man, observed that teenage love and related offences fall in a ‘legal grey area’ and it is debatable if that can be actually categorised as an offence under the POCSO Act.
The Court was hearing a Bail Application in FIR registered for an offence punishable under Section 363 IPC.
The bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad observed, “Teenage love and such offences fall in a legal grey area and it is debatable if that can be actually categorized as an offence.”
Advocate Kriti Ranjan appeared for the Appellant and APP Shoaib Haider appeared for the Respondent.
Brief Facts-
In the present case, a missing complaint was filed by the victim's father, stating that his 17.5-year-old daughter had left home and was untraceable. The FIR was registered alleging that the Petitioner had taken the victim with him. Both were found in Delhi and the victim's statement was recorded, where she admitted to eloping with the Petitioner. They had stayed in Madhya Pradesh and Bihar. Later, in a statement, the victim alleged she was confined, beaten, and forced into marriage with the Petitioner. The Petitioner was taken in custody and a charge sheet was filed for offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 368, 323, 344, 376, 506, 120B and 34 IPC and Sections 6, 17 and 21 of the POCSO Act.
The Court observed, “This Court is coming across several cases where girls who are more than about 17 years of age elope with boys of their choice and when they are caught, the parents of the victim force the victim to change the statement of the victim before the police. The police also records such statements at a later stage which is completely contrary to the earlier statements. Majority of the statements recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C also do not conform with the victim’s earlier statements given by the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C which is contradictory.”
The Court mentioned the decision in Sahil v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2024 and quoted, “Anant Janardhan Sunatkari v. State of Mahrashtra, 2021…, the Bombay High Court, while dealing with a case involving a 19 year old boy who had been convicted of rape of a 15 year old girl, released the accused on bail and has observed…I am also conscious of the fact that consensual sex between minors has been in a legal grey area because the consent given by minor is not considered to be a valid consent in eyes of law.”
Accordingly, the Court allowed the Bail Application.
Cause Title: Shubham v. State of NCT of Delhi (Neutral Citation 2024:DHC:7446)
Appearance:
Appellant: Advocates Kriti Ranjan, Kumar Gaurav and Niharika Punn
Respondent: APP Shoaib Haider
