WHY IN NEWS?
In “Jagbir V. State N.C.P of Delhi 2022”, High Court stated, “Consent of minor is immaterial and inconsequential in Law.” Court denied the bail under Sections 363, 366, 376 of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. FIR was lodged by the victim’s mother that her daughter was allegedly kidnapped and raped by an unknown person in 2019, and finally, through mobile technical surveillance and CDR location, she was found on Oct-08-2021 with an eight-month-year-old child and 1.5 months pregnant.
She married to accused in a temple, and zero opposition is taken from her side. The term “Kidnapping” is implemented because she is a minor (less than 18 years) results are immaterial.
CONTRADICTION WITH SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT
Similar cases can have different judgments varies on the set of circumstances.
“K Dhandapani v. State 2022” Girl married to a maternal Uncle and having 2 kids, is not guilty under POCSO Act. Supreme Court said, “There is a custom of marrying an uncle in Tamil Nadu, hence court cannot interfere in between happy married life.” Although the Madras High Court verdict was in favor of POCSO Act but overruled by Supreme Court.
Summarizing the whole, the Justice Scale, on one side, Marrying a minor girl with her consent, is inconsequential in law and immaterial, and on another side, SC says No interference in between the happy married life of Maternal Uncle and Niece.
QUESTION ARISING
Overall, this is a veering viewpoint of the Court verdict, involved in the same matter. There is a possibility that the “Jagbir V. State N.C.P of Delhi 2022,” plea in the Supreme Court may be the judgment arrives in the favor of the accused.
On the contrary, the case inclination is more on rape and kidnapping as the minor’s mother pleaded, resulting in POCSO Act charges and others as well.
Image Source: Adobe Stock
💫FOLLOW US FOR MORE UPDATES. ❌WE DO NOT HAVE IRRITATING AND SPAMMY NEWSLETTERS. ✅EVERYTHING IS AND WILL BE FREE FOREVER. SEE YOU AGAIN IN YOUR STORIES AND FEED 🙂
