Consent of a minor is immaterial under law: Allahabad High Court Rejects Bail Plea of Man Accused of Enticing Minor Sister-in-Law and Dowry Harassment

On January 2, 2025, the Allahabad High Court, in Devideen v. State of U.P. & Others, denied bail to an applicant accused under multiple charges, including Sections 498-A (cruelty to wife), 376(2)(N) (repeated rape), and provisions under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The case highlights the gravity of familial and societal harm caused by the accused's actions.

The applicant, Devideen, sought bail under Section 439 of the CrPC while facing charges in Case Crime No. 270 of 2023, lodged at Mau Police Station, District Chitrakoot. The allegations stemmed from complaints by his wife, who accused him of subjecting her to dowry harassment, cruelty, and threats following their six-year marriage. The complainant stated that after giving birth to a girl child, she was mistreated by her husband and in-laws, who threatened to remarry the accused.

Further, the applicant was accused of enticing and sexually assaulting his minor sister-in-law, aged 17, on two occasions—first on February 27, 2023, and again on August 23, 2023. The victim’s recovery and subsequent medical examination confirmed her age and indicated repeated exploitation.

The accused, who had a criminal history of a similar case under Sections 363 and 366A IPC, claimed innocence, alleging a financial dispute with the complainant's father as the motive for his false implication.

The Court held that the victim’s age (17 years) made her consent immaterial under law, as per the POCSO Act and Indian Penal Code. It also invoked Section 29 of the POCSO Act, which presumes guilt against the accused unless proven otherwise.

“The consent of a minor child is immaterial under the law,” the Court emphasized, rejecting arguments that the victim had willingly accompanied the applicant.

Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh condemned the applicant’s actions, stating: “The accused’s behavior represents an egregious violation of familial trust and moral integrity. Such actions not only undermine the sanctity of marriage but also cause profound emotional and psychological harm to the wife and family.”

The Court highlighted the applicant's role in disrupting familial harmony, noting that his conduct strained relationships between his wife and her younger sister.

The Court observed that this was the second incident involving the accused and the same minor victim, demonstrating a persistent disregard for the law and moral responsibilities. The applicant's past involvement in similar charges under Case Crime No. 37/2023 was also weighed against him.

“This Court cannot overlook the gravity of the conduct of the applicant, where he is engaged in an illicit relationship with his minor sister-in-law. Such behavior disrupts not just the marital relationship but the broader family unit.”

Considering the severity of the allegations, the applicant’s criminal history, and the societal implications of his actions, the Court rejected the bail plea. It clarified that the observations in the order were confined to the bail proceedings and would not influence the merits of the trial.

“I do not find any good ground to release the applicant on bail,” the Court concluded.

This case underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding the rights of women and minors while addressing offenses that disrupt familial and societal harmony. The Allahabad High Court’s rejection of bail sends a strong message about the legal and moral responsibilities of individuals within families.

Date of Decision: January 2, 2025