Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in POCSO Case, Emphasizes Prudent Application of the Act in Adolescent Relationships

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court, represented by Hon’ble Siddharth, J., delivered a judgment on 19th July 2023, granting bail to an accused in a case involving allegations of rape, penetrative sexual assault, and conspiracy under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act).

The case titled “Sameer vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others” saw the applicant, Sameer, seeking bail under Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 26824 of 2023. The victim, aged about 16-17 years, had alleged that she was subjected to the offense of rape in a hotel. However, the defense contended that the relationship between the victim and the accused was consensual.

In a pivotal part of the judgment, the court acknowledged previous judgments emphasizing the importance of judiciously applying the POCSO Act in cases involving adolescents and teenagers in romantic relationships. The court adopted a “bio-social approach” to understand the psychology and relationships of young individuals.

High court stated, “It is crucial to accept the science and psychology of an adolescent and young adulthood... their decision could be impulsive, immature but certainly not sinful or tainted as branded in the F.I.R. or complaint of the informant.”

Drawing upon these principles, the court held that the applicant deserved bail, taking into consideration the uncertainty surrounding the conclusion of the trial, one-sided investigation by the police, and the applicant’s fundamental right to a speedy trial. The court imposed conditions to ensure non-tampering of evidence and attendance at court hearings and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.

The judgment has sparked a debate on the application of the POCSO Act and its impact on adolescents involved in romantic relationships. Legal experts lauded the court’s approach to consider the psychological aspects of young individuals and warned against hasty application of the Act in such cases.

This landmark judgment serves as a reminder to the judiciary and law enforcement agencies to carefully evaluate the circumstances of each case, particularly when dealing with adolescent relationships. As the legal community applauds the High Court’s decision, the case sets a precedent for a nuanced and empathetic interpretation of the law concerning young individuals involved in consensual relationships.

Date of Decision: 19th July 2023

Sameer vs State Of U.P.And 3 Others

Latest Legal News