High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Divorce Cannot Be Granted Merely on WhatsApp Chats: Bombay High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Decree Based on Unproved Electronic Evidence State Cannot Demand Settlement Amount Yet Withhold Legitimate Refund: Bombay High Court Strikes Down MVAT Settlement Order Surveyor’s Report Is Not Sacrosanct; Arbitral Award Ignoring Vital Evidence Is Perverse: Delhi High Court Sets Aside Insurance Arbitration Award When Victim Lives Under Exclusive Control Of Accused, Burden Shifts To Accused To Explain What Happened: Calcutta High Court Medical Evidence Clearly Indicating Suicide Cannot Be Overlooked, Prosecution Must Prove Homicidal Death Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Andhra Pradesh High Court 'Candidates Acted With Full Knowledge of Consequences': Kerala High Court Reverses Order for Refund of 10% Exit Fee in Medical PG Mop-Up Admissions Dispensing with Departmental Inquiry Without Material is Arbitrary: Supreme Court Sets Aside Dismissal of Delhi Police Constable Power Of Attorney Holder Authorized To Enforce Pre-Emption Right Can File Suit, Death Of Principal Does Not Bar Legal Heirs: Orissa High Court Government Servant Convicted In Criminal Case Can Be Dismissed Without Departmental Enquiry: Tripura High Court Upholds Teacher’s Dismissal RTI Cannot Be Used To Bypass Statutory Bar On Police Case Diaries: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Penalty Against Police Officers Externment Cannot Be Based On Police Report And Stale Cases: Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes District Magistrate’s Order Even Exonerated Accused Can Be Summoned During Trial: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Summoning Under Section 358 BNSS Benefit of Doubt Acquittal Not Equal to Honourable Acquittal: Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Police Constable Candidate Madras High Court Allows NEET-Failed Student To Appear In CBSE Class XII Mathematics Exam After Last-Minute Subject Switch By Parents Salary of Parents Cannot Be Used to Deny OBC Non-Creamy Layer Status in Absence of Post Equivalence: Supreme Court Father Who Rapes Minor Daughter Cannot Seek Leniency: Bombay High Court Upholds Life Imprisonment Construction Of Toilet Is Bare Necessity For Proper Use Of Premises, Expression "Own Use" Not Confined To Landlord's Personal Physical Use: Calcutta High Court 353 IPC | Conviction Cannot Rest On Uncorroborated Testimony Of Sole Witness When Other Evidence Contradicts Occurrence: Delhi High Court Upholds Acquittal 250 BNSS | 60-Day Discharge Period Is Procedural, Does Not Extinguish Accused's Right To Seek Discharge: Gujarat High Court Section 45 PMLA Cannot Become an Instrument of Endless Incarceration: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in ₹18 Crore Scholarship Scam Case Land Acquisition — Heirs Who Slept on Rights for 23 Years Cannot Claim Ignorance to Revive Dead Challenge: Karnataka High Court Institutional Hearing Is No Violation of Natural Justice: Kerala High Court Upholds BPCL’s Termination of Decades-Old Petroleum Dealership Witnesses Not Expected To Recount Past Incidents With Mathematical Precision, Minor Contradictions Don't Demolish Credibility: Orissa High Court If a Suit Is Ex Facie Barred by Limitation, the Court Has No Choice but to Dismiss It: P&H High Court

Delhi HC notes teenage psychology and adolescent love cannot be controlled by courts

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Delhi High Court grants bail to teenager accused of rape after finding that the case was a "teenage love story." The accused was charged with rape and under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) for allegedly kidnapping and sexually assaulting a 16-year-old girl.

According to the prosecution's case, the accused had taken the girl to Chennai from Delhi and she was found there. It was also found that she was seven weeks pregnant. However, the girl consistently stated that she had gone with the accused out of her own free will as she had developed a liking for him. She also stated that it was only at her insistence that the accused had taken her to Chennai, and that she had informed him that she was 18 years of age.

The court found that the entire case was a "teenage love story" where the main characters, the girl and the accused, were only in their teens and had developed liking for each other. They had wanted to get married, and for that purpose, the girl had suggested getting pregnant immediately so that in case they were blessed with a child, her parents would not object to their relationship.

The court also observed that though the consent of a minor may be of no value in the eyes of the law, in the peculiar circumstances and facts of the present case, it would not be prudent for a court to label the accused as an accused. The court found that there was no incriminating evidence against the accused on record, and that he was not a criminal but was merely in love and had taken the girl to a place 2,200 km away from Delhi to lead a peaceful life.

The court also noted that the girl was allegedly 16 years of age on the day of the incident, but was working somewhere, which indicates that both the girl and the accused did not have the advantage of pursuing higher studies and had started working at an early age due to their financial background and status. The court observed that the social factors and forces that operate in any given case of adolescent love reveal that they may want to marry and settle down with each other.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the adverse impact of confinement on the accused's psychological health and future, the court granted bail to the accused for a period of two months, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court/Link Court/Successor Court/Duty Magistrate. The accused was also directed to provide his mobile number to the Investigating Officer, which shall be kept active and in working conditions at all times, and to surrender before the Trial Court concerned at the expiry of the two-month period. The court clarified that every case of such nature has to be adjudged on its own peculiar facts and circumstances.

Date of Decision: 08.05.2023

MAHESH KUMAR  vs STATE (NCT OF DELHI) 

Latest Legal News