Whether Minor Muslim Girls who have attained Puberty are entitled to get the protection of the POCSO Act?

 I am in agreement with Mr Mahajan that POCSO is an Act for protection of children below 18 years of age from sexual abuse and exploitation. It is not customary law specific but the aim of the Act is to protect children below the age of 18 years from sexual abuse. The statement of object of the POCSO Act states that the Act is aimed to secure the tender age of the children and ensure they are not abused and their childhood and

youth is protected against exploitation. {Para 9}

10. For the reasons above, I reject the contention of the petitioner that according to Muslim law since the victim has attained the age of puberty the rigours of POCSO Act will not be applicable.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

W.P.(CRL) 1449/2022 & CRL.M.A. 12616/2022

IMRAN  Vs STATE OF DELHI 

CORAM:  MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

Date of decision: 06.07.2022

1. This is a petition seeking quashing of FIR No. 196/2022 dated

29.01.2022, PS-Ranjit Nagar, Delhi, under Sections 376/506 IPC & Section

6 of POCSO Act and the charge sheet dated 29.03.2022, under Sections

376/506/406/377 IPC read with Section 6 of POCSO Act and Section 4 of

Dowry Prohibition Act pending before learned ASJ-01 (West) Special

Court, POCSO Act.

2. It is stated in the FIR that the child victim was aged 16 years and 5

months on 01.01.2022 i.e. the date of the first incident. It is stated that the petitioner visited the house of the victim and requested the parents of the victim for marriage with the victim. The parents of the victim agreed on the

condition that the marriage will only take place when the victim clears her

Class XII.

3. It is also stated that the parents of the victim gave Rs. 1 lakh in cash,

silver chain, watch, Oppo company mobile, gold ring, clothes, etc. at the

time of engagement of the petitioner and the victim. Subsequently, the father

of the victim also allegedly gave a sum of Rs 10 lakhs to the petitioner by

selling his house for Rs. 6 lakhs and taking loan on interest of Rs 4 lakhs. It

is further stated in the FIR that after the engagement, the petitioner had

physical relationship with the victim on 01.01.2022 and thereafter on

03.01.2022. It is stated that subsequently, the petitioner refused to get

married to the victim and abused the victim as well as her parents.

4. Mr Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner at the outset

states that the petitioner has never refused to marry the victim and even

today is ready and willing to marry the victim.

5. The parents of the victim are present in Court and have been

identified by the Investigating Officer and state that due to whatever has

transpired in the last so many months they are not interested in getting the

victim married with the petitioner.

6. Mr Ahmed submits that the FIR has been filed on 29.01.2022 i.e.

almost after a month of the incidents which were 01.01.2022 and

03.01.2022. He further submits that the petitioner returned Rs. 1,53,005/- in

the bank account of the mother of the victim, gave Rs. 30,000/- in cash and

paid Rs. 2,42,522/- on 09.06.2021 and Rs. 1,57,600/- on 18.12.2021 for

purchasing the building material to construct the house of father of victim.

He further submits that the provisions of Section 6 of POCSO Act is not

applicable to the present case, as according to Muslim Personal Law, the

victim is a major as she has attained puberty. He further submits that the

victim has refused to undergo medical examination and the allegations are

false and have been levelled only to pressurize the petitioner.

7. Mr Mahajan, learned ASC states that at the stage of quashing what

requires to be seen by the Court is whether a cognizable offence is made

from the reading of the FIR and the material filed in the charge sheet

including 164 Cr.P.C statement. He further states that Section 6 POCSO Act

is not religious specific but age specific. The aim of the POCSO Act is to

prevent children from sexual crimes. It is the age which is important and

admittedly in the present case the victim was less than 18 years of age. The

pleas taken by the petitioner are in the nature of defence which can only be

adjudicated after trial.

8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the

record.

9. I am in agreement with Mr Mahajan that POCSO is an Act for

protection of children below 18 years of age from sexual abuse and

exploitation. It is not customary law specific but the aim of the Act is to

protect children below the age of 18 years from sexual abuse. The statement

of object of the POCSO Act states that the Act is aimed to secure the tender

age of the children and ensure they are not abused and their childhood and

youth is protected against exploitation.

10. For the reasons above, I reject the contention of the petitioner that according to Muslim law since the victim has attained the age of puberty the rigours of POCSO Act will not be applicable.

11. As regards the other arguments of the learned counsel for the

petitioner are concerned, I am of the view that the same are in the nature of

defence and can only be proved/disproved after trial. None of the ingredients

of the principles given in State of Haryana v. Bhajanlal, 1992 SCC (Crl.)

426 are applicable to the facts of the present case and hence, the petition is

dismissed.

JASMEET SINGH, J

JULY 6, 2022

Print Page