Delhi HC: Marriage does not erase POCSO liability

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has refused to quash a sexual assault case against a man who married the minor girl, saying her wish to continue living with him and the criminal liability for the alleged acts are distinct in the eyes of law.

The high court said the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act was enacted to afford children special protection against sexual abuse and exploitation.

“Parliament has deliberately fixed an age (18 years) below which consent to sexual activity has no legal efficacy. The protection does not depend upon proof of force, coercion or deception, or upon an assessment of whether the particular child was sufficiently mature to understand the relationship,” Justice Sanjeev Narula said in a judgment passed on November 4.

The high court referred to a Supreme Court judgment which made clear that marriage does not remove the protection that penal law affords to a child.

“The victim’s wish to continue living with the petitioner, her mother’s support for that choice and the welfare of the child have received due consideration.

“The court does not doubt the sincerity of their request or overlook the hardship that continuation of the proceedings may entail for the family. Those considerations, however, do not answer the allegations or furnish an independent ground for quashing a prosecution of this nature,” it said.

The court said the girl’s wishes and criminal liability for acts allegedly committed during her minority were separate legal considerations.

It was hearing a plea seeking quashing of an FIR registered in 2023 for kidnapping and sexual assault under the IPC and POCSO Act. The girl’s mother had reported her missing in February 2023. She was traced in December and found to be pregnant.

The man’s counsel said the couple married in February 2023 and had a child in June 2024. However, the prosecution opposed the plea, citing school records showing the girl was around 14 years and 10 months old when she left home.

The court observed that the material prima facie established a physical relationship and that the man acknowledged fathering the child. It held that marriage, settlement and humanitarian considerations could not justify quashing proceedings involving serious POCSO allegations. (PTI)

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

The Hans India