Injustice With Adolescent Boys: M.P. High Court Requests Centre To Consider Reducing Consent Age Of Victim From 18 To 16 Yrs In Rape Cases
The Madhya Pradesh High Court, Gwalior Bench has requested the Government of India to think about reducing the consent age of the victim from 18 to 16 years in rape cases saying that injustice is going on with the adolescent boys.
The Court said that due to the amendment in Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, the fabric of the society has been disturbed.
A Single Bench of Justice Deepak Kumar Agarwal said, “… this Court would like to share its experience as a Judge that before amendments in IPC under Section 375 of IPC regarding age of prosecutrix for the purpose of consent that was 16 years and subsequently enhanced by amendment upto 18 years due to this amendment, fabric of society has been disturbed. … Today, most of criminal cases in which prosecutrix is under 18 years of age, due to aforesaid anomaly, injustice is going on with adolescent boys. Thus, I request Government of India to think over the matter for reducing the age of prosecutrix from 18 to 16 years as earlier before amendments so that injustice should be redressed.”
The Bench noted that nowadays, every male or female near the age of 14 years due to social media awareness and easily accessible internet connectivity is getting puberty at an early age.
Advocate Rajmani Bansal appeared on behalf of the petitioner while Panel Lawyer Neeraj Dhamania appeared on behalf of the State.
In this case, a plea was filed by the petitioner i.e., the accused for quashing the FIR registered against him under Sections 376(2)(F)(n), 376(3), 315 of the IPC as well as under Section 5(L)(O)/6 of the POCSO Act and 66 of the IT Act. He also sought to set aside the sessions trial against him. The victim had lodged a complaint against him that she used to go to take coaching classes from him and one day when there was no one present over there, he committed sexual intercourse with her and made a video of the same after making her unconscious.
Thereafter, on the pretext of making the video viral, he was alleged to have made a physical relationship with her many times. It was further alleged that when the victim came to know that she was pregnant, the petitioner fed her a tablet which caused her miscarriage. He also used to come to her house several times through the roof and made a physical relationship with her. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that a false FIR has been lodged and that if any intercourse was done, the same was with the victim’s consent without any involvement of force as there was no evidence of penetration.
The High Court in view of the above facts held, “Be that as it may, at this juncture, this Court is of the opinion that the proceeding of the case before the trial Court would serve no purpose in the peculiar facts and circumstances. On due consideration being given to the submission of the parties, the prayer of the petitioner is hereby allowed.”
The Court before parting with the case observed that female and male children are getting attracted to each other which is resulting in physical relationships with consent and hence, in such cases, male persons are not at all criminal.
“It is only a matter of age when they come into contact with female and develop physical relationship. Only due to this reason, lawmakers in IPC when it came into force put the age of female as 16 years since they were well aware of the aforesaid facts. Generally, girls and boys of adolescents age develop friendship and thereafter, due to attraction make physical relationship. But, due to this rider boy is treated like a criminal in the society”, said the Court.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the plea and quashed the FIR as well as proceedings against the petitioner.
Cause Title- Rahul Chandel Jatav v. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr.
