Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes State Election Commission's Cancellation of Panchayat Elections in Punjab J&K High Court Quashes FIR Against Bajaj Allianz, Asserts Insurance Dispute Shouldn’t Be Criminalized Sole Eyewitness's Testimony Insufficient to Sustain Murder Conviction: Madras High Court Acquits Three Accused in Murder Case Presumption of Innocence is Strengthened in Acquittal Cases; Appellate Courts Must Respect Trial Court Findings Unless Clearly Perverse: Delhi High Court NDPS | Physical or Virtual Presence of Accused is Mandatory for Extension of Detention Beyond 180 Days: Andhra Pradesh HC Bombay High Court Quashes Suspension of Welfare Benefits for Construction Workers Due to Model Code of Conduct Section 131 of Electricity Act Does Not Mandate Finalized Transfer Scheme Before Bidding: Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Privatization of UT Chandigarh Electricity Department Revenue Authorities Must Safeguard State Property, Not Indulge in Land Scams: Madhya Pradesh High Court Proposed Amendment Clarifies, Not Changes, Cause of Action: High Court of Jharkhand emphasizing the necessity of amendment for determining real questions in controversy. EWS Candidates Selected on Merit Should Not Be Counted Towards Reserved Quota: P&H High Court Finance Act 2022 Amendments Upheld: Supreme Court Validates Retrospective Customs Authority for DRI Mere Breach Of Contract Does Not Constitute A Criminal Offense Unless Fraudulent Intent Exists From The Start: Delhi High Court Anticipatory Bail Not Intended As A Shield To Avoid Lawful Proceedings In Cases Of Serious Crimes: Allahabad High Court Rajasthan High Court Grants Bail in Light of Prolonged Detention and Delays in Trial U/S 480 BNSS Provision Bombay High Court Orders Disclosure of Candidates' Marks in Public Recruitment Process: Promotes Transparency under RTI Act Maintenance | Father's Duty to Support Daughters Until Self-Sufficiency or Marriage: Karnataka High Court Designation of Arbitration 'Venue' as 'Seat' Confers Exclusive Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Rules in Dubai Arbitration Case Corporate Veil Shields Company Assets from Partition as Joint Family Property: Madras High Court Principal Employers Liable for ESI Contributions for Contract Workers, But Assessments Must Be Fair and Account for Eligibility: Kerala High Court Government Entities Must be Treated Equally to Private Parties in Arbitration Proceedings: Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Resumption of Disciplinary Inquiry Against Storekeeper in Ration Misappropriation Case

Supreme Court Grants Bail to Teen, Emphasizes Consensual Relationship in POCSO Case Involving 16-Year-Old

08 October 2024 10:41 AM

By: sayum


Supreme Court of India granted bail to Deshraj @ Musa in Deshraj @ Musa vs State of Rajasthan (Criminal Appeal No. 11020/2024), who had been charged under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The appellant, 18 years old at the time of the incident, was accused of abducting a 16-year-old girl and attempting to commit sexual offenses.

The case originated from FIR No. 77/2024, registered on April 28, 2024, at Thoi Police Station, District Neem Ka Thana. The appellant was charged under IPC Sections 354(D) (stalking), 506 (criminal intimidation), 363 (kidnapping), 366 (abduction with intent to compel marriage), and 376 (rape), along with Sections 7/8 and 11/12 of the POCSO Act. The appellant was arrested in May 2024, and the chargesheet was filed on June 5, 2024. His bail applications were initially rejected by both the trial court and the High Court.

The appellant's counsel argued that he was only 18 at the time of the alleged offense and that the victim, 16, was involved in a consensual relationship. They emphasized that the trial would be prolonged, with 12 witnesses yet to be examined. In contrast, the State contended that the victim was a minor and denied any consensual relationship, emphasizing the seriousness of the charges.

The Supreme Court, after hearing both sides, decided to grant bail, taking into account the young age of the appellant, the prolonged trial, and the fact that the relationship was claimed to be consensual. The Court imposed strict conditions, including barring the appellant from contacting the victim or influencing witnesses.

The Supreme Court directed the trial court to release the appellant on bail, subject to specific conditions to ensure his cooperation in the trial and prevent any misuse of his liberty.

Date of Decision: October 4, 2024

Deshraj @ Musa vs State of Rajasthan

 

Similar News