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.