NEW DELHI: In a case marked by unusual circumstances, the Supreme Court invoked its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution to quash a man's conviction and sentence under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act. The case involved a Class 12 girl who filed a complaint against a youth after he refused to marry her, leading to his conviction and 10-year imprisonment in 2019 for having physical relations with a minor.
Background of the Case
The girl later married another man, but the union ended abruptly after three days when he discovered her past relationship. While the convict was out on bail, he reconciled with the survivor, and they decided to wed. After their marriage, the couple began living together.
Legal Proceedings
The survivor approached the Madras High Court, seeking further examination to reveal the "untold truth" of the case and requesting that her husband's conviction be set aside, as they had settled the matter amicably. The high court refused her plea, prompting the couple to move the Supreme Court.
The apex court directed the judicial magistrate of Tamil Nadu's Harur to record her statement regarding the status of their relationship and marriage and instructed the couple to appear before it. During the interaction, the survivor made an additional demand of Rs 10 lakh from her husband as a security sum, which he paid. Subsequently, the Supreme Court quashed his conviction.
Supreme Court's Order
A bench of Justices J K Maheshwari and Atul S Chandurkar observed, "The appellant and the victim have solemnised the marriage on attaining the age of majority... Therefore, at this stage, without entering into the merits of the case, in the peculiar facts, as narrated above, we deem it appropriate to exercise our plenary power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the judgment of conviction and sentence of the appellant and in terms of the statements as recorded, the appellant is acquitted from the charge."
The court further stated, "Accordingly, the appeals are allowed and on the basis of subsequent events the conviction and sentence as directed by the sessions court and confirmed by the high court stand set aside. The appellant and the victim are left free to live their life peacefully in society as spouses."
Precedent Clarification
The bench clarified that the order was passed in the peculiar facts of the case and would not be treated as a precedent for any other purpose. This ensures that similar cases will be evaluated on their own merits.
