‘POCSO Act has become an instrument for exploitation of young couple’: Allahabad HC grants bail in rape case

In a recent judgment, the Allahabad High Court has come out with a sharp criticism of the misuse of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. It has pointed out a worrying trend of this vital legislation being misused for personal vendettas, thereby undermining the credibility and integrity of the justice system and the POCSO Act itself.

“The POCSO Act was enacted 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 criminalise consensual romantic relationships between adolescents,” the court said.

It was stressed that while granting bail in POCSO Act cases, the existence of a consensual romantic relationship should be taken into consideration. Indeed, ignoring the statement of the victim and allowing the accused to remain in jail would result in grave injustice.

A bench headed by Justice Krishan Pahal was hearing a bail petition filed by one Prakash Kumar Gupta, accused under Sections 363, 366, 376(3) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 5L/6 of the POCSO Act.

The prosecution alleged that Gupta had seduced a 13-year-old girl and then performed sexual acts on her. The First Information Report (FIR) filed by the informant, who claimed to be the girl’s guardian, stated that the victim was a minor, triggering the stringent provisions of the POCSO Act.

However, a crucial piece of evidence that came to light during the proceedings was the ossification test report, which showed that the survivor was about 19, making her a legal adult. This fact changed the story considerably and raised serious concerns about the application of the POCSO Act in the case.

Justice Pahal noted that the misrepresentation of the girl’s age was not accidental but deliberate to misuse the POCSO Act and impose serious legal consequences on the accused.

He stressed that this misrepresentation led to the suspect being wrongly imprisoned for more than six months, which could have caused serious damage to his life, reputation and future.

“The POCSO Act is meant to protect minors but in this case there appears to be a misuse because of the false information provided by the informant… This situation is an example of how the misuse of protective laws like the POCSO Act can lead to significant injustice,” the judge observed.

He further stressed that this case underscores the need for thorough fact-checking, especially in sensitive cases involving minors, to ensure that the law is correctly applied and justice is achieved for all parties involved.

Justice Pahal pointed out that since the girl was an adult as per the ossification test, she was capable of consenting to a relationship. Therefore, the application of the POCSO Act was not appropriate in this scenario.

The court therefore granted the request for bail without ruling on the merits of the case.