POCSO Act has become an instrument of exploitation; it was never meant to criminalise consensual romantic relationships between adolescents: Allahabad HC

During the trial, the court was considering a request for bail in a case alleging violations of Articles 363, 366, 376(3) of the Criminal Code and 5L/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

The bank of Judge Krishan Pahal observed“The POCSO Act was designed to protect children below the age of 18 from sexual exploitation. Today, it has more often than not become an instrument for their exploitation. The Act was never intended to criminalize consensual romantic relationships between adolescents.”

Advocate Raj Kumar Singh appeared for the appellant and Advocate Ajeet Kumar Singh appeared for the defendant.

The Public Prosecution Service states that the plaintiff lured away the informant’s minor daughter, who was approximately 13 years old.

While noting the misuse of POCSO in the present case, the Court said: “This situation illustrates how the misuse of protective laws like the POCSO Act can lead to significant injustices. It underscores the need for careful verification of facts, particularly in sensitive cases involving minors, to ensure that the law is applied appropriately and justice is done to all parties involved.”

The Court has stated that the When granting bail, the fact that the relationship is based on love must be taken into account, as it would be a breach of due process if the victim’s statement were ignored and the accused had to remain in jail.

The Court referred to the Supreme Court’s judgment in Manish Sisodia vs Directorate of Enforcement 2024 INSC 595 where, according to the Court, SC has again emphasized the very well established principle of law that bail should not be withheld as a punishment should not be forgotten. It is high time that the courts recognise the principle that “bail is the rule and imprisonment the exception”.

The court summoned the Chief Medical Officer and the Additional Director, Health to explain the delays in conducting ossification tests. At the same time, the court observed that victims are facing unnecessary harassment due to delays in medico-legal radiological examination, mainly due to the shortage of radiologists in various districts.

The Court held that the plaintiff filed an application for bail.

The court therefore granted the request for bail.

The court has archived the case for September 27, 2024.

Cause Title: Prakash Kumar Gupta v. State of UP

Click here to read/download the judgment