Granting bail for two months to a young man in a
POCSO case arising from his consensual relationship with a minor girl, the
Delhi High Court has said teenage psychology and adolescent love cannot be
controlled by courts and judges have to be careful while handling bail pleas in
such cases.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said although a minor's
consent may be of no value in the eyes of law, the court is "not dealing
with criminals" in cases of elopement of adolescent couples but
"teenage individuals who wanted to live their life as they deemed fit being
in love". The court noted in the present case, the prosecutrix and the
accused were stated to be 16 and 19 years of age, respectively, at the relevant
time and were now going to get married at the end of the month, and directed
the latter be released for two months.
"The main character i.e. the present accused is
not a criminal, but was merely in love and at the instance of her lady love,
being unaware of the nitty-gritties of law, had taken her to a place which was
2200 km away from Delhi to lead a peaceful life...Love of course did not
understand or knew the bar of age of consent as the lovers only knew that they
have right to love and lead life as they thought fit for themselves," said
the court in its order dated May 8.
"Considering the overall facts and
circumstances of the case, accused/applicant is admitted to bail, for a period
of two months from the date of release, on furnishing personal bond in the sum
of Rs.10,000/- with one surety of like amount," it ordered.
The court clarified that every case of such nature
has to be adjudged on its own peculiar facts and circumstances, and the age
being in shadow of doubt as well as the consistency in the statement of the
prosecutrix and lack of inducement or threat in such cases needed to be
considered. The FIR in the present case was lodged on a missing-person
complaint by the sister of the prosecutrix in 2021 for alleged commission of
offences under the Indian Penal Code and Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences (POCSO) Act. The couple was subsequently found in Chennai and the
prosecutrix maintained that she was in a relationship with the accused and they
ran away at her behest.
"Though, the entire story reads like story of a
romantic novel or a film about teenage love, in real life, this court notes that
it had two main characters in their teens who loved each other, supported each
other and somehow wanted their relationship in marriage to be validated, and
for that, the only idea that came to the mind of the prosecutrix was giving
birth to a child from their union," observed the court. It added that
adolescent love has to be scrutinised in the backdrop of the parties' real life
situations and teenagers who "try to imitate romantic culture of films and
novels" remain unaware about the laws and the age of consent.
"The prosecutrix and the accused herein might
have made a mistake in the affairs of the heart, however, the teenage
psychology and adolescent love cannot be controlled by the Courts and therefore
the judges have to be careful while rejecting or granting bail in such cases
depending on the facts and circumstances of each case," said the court.
"The social factors and forces that operate in any given case and the
circumstances of cases of adolescent love reveal in a sizable percentage of
cases that they may want to marry and settle down with each other," it
added.
The court underscored that in such cases of teenage
love, "genuine innocent teenage boys and girls" languish in jail or
in protection home, which has a negative impact on their future too. "This
court notes that in such cases, confinement in jail will cause distress and
will impact the psychological health of the accused also. The court, however,
is bound by the law as it is and therefore, at this stage, in such
circumstances can only direct that the accused be granted his freedom of bail
and not languish in jail," said the court.