Explained Case of 14 Y/O Girl Had 'Sufficient Knowledge & Capacity' To Understand Her Actions: Bombay HC Grants Bail To POCSO Accused
Explained Case of 14 Y/O Girl Had 'Sufficient Knowledge & Capacity' To Understand Her Actions: Bombay HC Grants Bail To POCSO Accused
The Bombay High Court on Monday granted bail to a 24-year-old man booked for raping a 14-year-old minor girl, noting that the victim had 'sufficient knowledge' and 'capacity' to know the 'full import of her actions' as she 'voluntarily' stayed with the accused for 4 days.
In its 10-page order, a bench of Justice Milind Jadhav considered the statements of the victim wherein she said that she had a consensual relationship with the accused and that she was aware of her actions and stayed with the Applicant for more than 3 days and 3 nights.
“The conduct of the prosecution in this case is indicative of the fact that she left her home without informing her parents by her own will and also stayed with Applicant for 4 days. No doubt that the prosexutrix under the purview of POCSO Act is a minor, however the facts of the present case indicate that she had sufficient knowledge and capacity to know the full import of her actions and what she was doing and had only thereafter voluntarily joined and stayed with the Applicant for 4 days,” the single judge observed in its order.
Additionally, the Court also took into account the fact that the accused, who was arrested in 2019 at the age of 19, had already spent over 5 years, 2 months, and 23 days in jail.
The case -
Vijay Chand Dubey .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Anr. .. Respondents
Date of occurrence / incident is from
19.11.2019 to 25.11.2019. Applicant is arrested on 25.11.2019 and is
incarceration for 5 years 2 months and 23 days
victim was 14 years of age and Applicant was 19 years at that time.
According to victim both of them known to each other for
the past 2 years prior to the incident and had developed a love relation
with each other.
she and Applicant in fact had a consensual relationship as also the incident in respect of which complaint has been filed.
Assistance is drawn from the decision of the Supreme
Court in the case of S. Varadarajan v. State of Madras 3
wherein the Court in paragraph No.2 has held thus:- “2. Where a minor girl alleged to be taken away by the accused person, had left her father’s protection knowing
and having capacity to know the full import of what she was doing and voluntarily joined the accused, it could not be said that the accused had taken her away from the keeping of her lawful guarding within the meaning
of section 361 of the Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC for short). Something more had to be done in a case of that kind, such as an inducement held out by the accused person
or an active participation by him in the formation of the intention immediately prior to the minor leaving her father protection or at some earlier stage.”
Insofar as the present case is concerned, it is seen that victim has left her parents’ house without informing the parents and has stayed with Applicant for 3 days and 3 nights as also she has
confessed that she was in love with the Applicant and travelled alongwith him to different places and had a consensual encounter.
In view of the above observations and facts delineated herein above the Applicant before me is entitled for bail.
