In a significant ruling, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has firmly refused to suspend the 20-year rigorous imprisonment sentence awarded to a man convicted under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The case involves a man who was accused of raping a 17-year-old girl, whom he later married during the trial.
Court's Firm Stance on Minor's Consent
A division bench comprising Justices Vivek Agarwal and R K Choubey delivered the judgment, making a crucial legal point clear. The bench stated that the consent of a minor to a sexual relationship is immaterial and holds no legal weight. Emphasizing the gravity of offences under the POCSO Act, the court clarified that the power to suspend the sentence of a person convicted for rape under this act rests solely with the Supreme Court, which can exercise its extraordinary authority under Article 142 of the Constitution.
Details of the Case and Defence Arguments
The prosecution's case detailed a harrowing sequence of events. According to the complaint lodged on June 1, 2023, in Itarsi, the survivor used to visit her grandmother where she became acquainted with the accused. On February 14, 2023, he invited her to lunch at his house. There, he allegedly raped her and threatened to kill her if she disclosed the incident. The complaint further alleged that he blackmailed and raped her on three more occasions.
The accused later married the survivor when he was out on bail during the trial, and the couple now has a child. The appellant's counsel pleaded for leniency on several grounds:
- The survivor was 17 years old and a consenting partner.
- Other coordinate benches had granted suspension of sentence in cases involving younger victims.
- A son was born from the wedlock, and the survivor would be left to care for the child alone if the sentence was upheld.
Legal Prerogative and Final Verdict
The High Court bench, however, was unequivocal in its rejection of these arguments. It reiterated that since it was conclusively established that the survivor was a minor at the time of the incidents, the accused could not be absolved of the charges. The court termed the decision to suspend such a sentence as a "prerogative of the Supreme Court" under Article 142.
This ruling underscores the judiciary's strict interpretation of the POCSO Act, prioritizing the protection of minors over subsequent mitigating circumstances like marriage or the birth of a child. The judgment reinforces the principle that sexual relationships with minors constitute a serious crime, regardless of later developments or claims of consent.
