Bombay High Court
Satish S/O Bhagwan Petare vs State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Arni Tq.Arni ... on 19 November, 2025
2025:BHC-NAG:12520-DB
1 945.APL.671-2022..JUDGMENT.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 671 OF 2022
Satish S/o Bhagwan Petare
Aged about 28 Years, Occ: Service,
R/o. Manpur, Po.Tq. Arni,
District Yavatmal. APPLICANT
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra,
Through its Police Station Officer,
Police Station, Arni,
Tq. Arni, District Yavatmal.
2. XYZ
Police Station Officer,
Police Station, Arni, Tq. Arni, District
Yavatmal in Crime No.916/2021. NON-APPLICANTS
-----------------------------------------------
Mr. V.S. Gokhale, Advocate a/w Mr. R.J. Shinde, Advocate for
the Applicant.
Mr. N.B. Jawade, APP for the Non-applicant No.1/State.
Mrs. A.P. Murrey, Advocate (Appointed) for the Non-applicant
No.2.
-----------------------------------------------
CORAM : URMILA JOSHI PHALKE AND
NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATED : 19th NOVEMBER, 2025.
ORAL JUDGMENT :- (PER : URMILA JOSHI PHALKE, J.)
2 945.APL.671-2022..JUDGMENT.odt
1. Heard.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally
by the consent of learned Counsel for the respective parties.
3. The present Application is preferred by the
Applicant for quashing of the First Information Report in
connection with Crime No.916/2021 registered under Sections
376(2)(n), 313, 354-D, 450, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and 4
and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act
(for short 'the POCSO Act').
4. Brief facts of the prosecution case as emerges from
the Police papers are as under:
4(i). As per the report lodged, in the year 2018 the
Victim was aged about 17 years. The Applicant and the Victim
both were residing adjacent to each other. As per the allegation,
the Applicant was stalking her by expressing his feeling that he
is having love an affection for her and wants to marry her. The
Victim relied on the promise of marriage given by the Applicant
and on the promise of marriage he subjected her for physical
3 945.APL.671-2022..JUDGMENT.odt
relationship, for which the Victim has resisted but the Applicant
has subjected her for forceful sexual assault on various
occasions and subsequently the Applicant denied to perform the
marriage with her. It is further alleged that, the parents of the
Applicant has also opposed the said marriage and told them that
they will solemnize the marriage after getting the job service to
the Applicant and she was constrained to abort the child. On the
basis of the said report, Police have registered the crime against
the present Applicant.
5. Heard learned Counsel for the Applicant, who
submitted that, the FIR is lodged by her when she attained the
age of majority. Due to love relationship between the Applicant
and Non-applicant No.2, the consensual relationship was
developed between them, and therefore, no prima facie offence
is made out against the present Applicant. In view of that, the
Application deserves to be allowed. He placed reliance on the
order passed by this Court in Criminal Application (APL)
No. 99/2023 decided on 25.08.2025.
6. Per contra, learned APP strongly opposed the said
Application and submitted that at the relevant time the Victim
4 945.APL.671-2022..JUDGMENT.odt
was below 18 years of age, her consent was not relevant and the
issue regarding the adolescent relationship is pending before the
Hon'ble Apex Court. In view of that, the Application deserves to
be rejected. In support of his contention, he relied upon the
order passed by this Court in Criminal Application (APL)
No. 1128/2025 decided on 26.09.2025.
7. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the
entire investigation papers it reveals that, at the time of the
alleged incident the Victim was below 18 years of age. Her birth
certificate was collected during the investigation. Her statement
is also recorded. Her medical certificate is also placed on record,
which shows that there was a physical relationship developed
with the Victim. Her statement was recorded under Section 164
of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The statements of other
witnesses also substantiates the said fact. It also reveals from
the investigation papers that, due to the forceful sexual assault
or the sexual assault on the promise of marriage turned into her
pregnancy and the said pregnancy was terminated.
8. Before entering into the merits of the case, we
would like to refer the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the
5 945.APL.671-2022..JUDGMENT.odt
case of Right to Privacy of Adolescents, Suo Motu Writ Petition
(C) No.3 of 2023 with Criminal Appeal No.1451 of 2024,
decided on 23rd May 2025, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court
has shown concern regarding criminalization of consensual
adolescent relationships under POCSO Act. Learned Amicus
Curiae had prayed for certain directions to be given to the
Central Government to consider decriminalizing adolescent
relationships under POCSO Act and to frame a national sex
education policy and the Hon'ble Supreme Court had given
certain directions to the Central Government and asked to
consider the implementation of the suggestions of the learned
Amicus Curiae based on the report. It appears that the final
directions are already given by the Apex Court in the following
manner:
It is directed by the Apex Court that:
"We direct the State to take following measures:
i) To act as a true guardian of the victim and her child;
ii) To provide a better shelter to the victim and her family
within a period of few months from today;
iii) To bear the entire expenditure of the education of the
victim till Xth standard examination and if she desires to
take up education for a degree course, till the completion of
degree course. After she passes her Xth standard
6 945.APL.671-2022..JUDGMENT.odt
examination, the State can offer her vocational training,
obviously, at the cost of the State;
iv) To bear the entire expenditure of the education of the
child up to Xth standard and ensuring that she is educated
in a very good school in the vicinity of the place of
residence of the victim; and
v) To endeavour to take the assistance of NGOs or public-
spirited citizens for the purpose of securing the debts
incurred by the victim as a one-time measure."
9. The Hon'ble Apex Court further issued notice to the
Union of India through the Secretary of the Ministry of Women
and Child Development and directed to serve the notice to the
said Secretary. It is further directed that the Secretary of the
Ministry of Women and Child Development shall appoint a
Committee of experts to deal with the suggestions of the
learned Amicus Curiae. Senior officers of the State shall be a
part of the Committee. If necessary, the Committee can also
consult the learned Senior counsel appointed as Amicus Curiae.
Immediately on service of notice, the Secretary shall constitute a
Committee. The members of the Committee constituted by this
Court shall be permanent invitees to the said Committee; and
the Committee shall submit a detailed report before the
returnable date to this Court. To consider the implementation of
7 945.APL.671-2022..JUDGMENT.odt
the suggestions of the learned Amicus Curiae based on the said
report, this Court will pass further directions from time to time.
10. It appears that the final directions are still awaited.
The Central Government has filed its response before the Apex
Court. The copy of the response is also placed on record in
another matter. The stand taken by the Union of India in the
reply is that reducing the age of consent would reintroduce the
very mischief the law was enacted to prevent. The amendment
in the said enactment serves the legitimate state interest of
protecting minors from sexual exploitation and ensuring that
welfare of child is paramount, and therefore, submitted that the
existing age of consent ought to be retained in order to give full
effect to the legislative intent, protect the bodily integrity of
children, and uphold the constitutional and statutory safeguards
accorded to them.
11. In the background of the above proceeding which is
pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court, it would be relevant to
consider the object with which the Protection of Children from
Sexual Offences Act was introduced. The primary object of
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act are to
8 945.APL.671-2022..JUDGMENT.odt
protect all children under 18 from sexual assault, sexual
harassment and child pornography and to provide a supportive
environment for child victims. The act ends to achieve this part
strengthening legal provisions against child sexual abuse,
mandating the reporting of offences to prevent under reporting,
establishing special Courts for speedy trials and creating the
child friendly legal process that protects the victim's identity
and mental health. The Act was introduced to protect children.
Now the question is what should be the age group to consider
that it is adolescent love or love between two adolescents and
now the said issue is pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court.
This aspect is already dealt by the co-ordinate Bench in the case
of Aakash s/o Nanasaheb Waghmare Vs. The State of
Maharashtra and another in Criminal Application
No.2514/2024, decided on 25th June 2025 and by referring the
decision of K. Dhandapani vs. State by the Inspector of Police,
2022 SCC Online SC 1056, observed that when the offence was
committed, the prosecutrix was aged 14 years. She gave birth
to the first child when she was 15 years and the second child
was born when she was 17 years of age. The Hon'ble Apex
Court in clear terms observed that, "In the peculiar facts and
9 945.APL.671-2022..JUDGMENT.odt
circumstances of this case, we are of the considered view that
the conviction and sentence of the appellant who is maternal
uncle of the prosecutrix deserves to be set aside in view of the
subsequent events that have been brought to the notice of this
Court." It is observed by the co-ordinate Bench that there was a
full-fledged trial wherein accused was convicted by the Special
Judge, confirmed by the High Court and then the matter
reached the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The entire evidence was
before the Hon'ble Supreme Court when the matter was heard.
Even with directions by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 8 th
March 2022, it was directed that the District Judge should
record the statement of the prosecutrix about her present status
and that subsequent events were then considered. The powers
those were exercised in that matter by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court, were under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, and
therefore, the said cannot be considered while considering the
present compromise or prayer based upon the so-called
compromise. The other decisions which the applicant wants to
rely on are of Co-equal Bench and taking into consideration the
facts, the powers then exercised.
10 945.APL.671-2022..JUDGMENT.odt
12. In the light of the above observation and the object
of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act by
turning to the facts of the present case, if we consider the
recitals of the FIR, it can be seen that she fell in love with the
applicant and as there was acceptance on their relationship, as
far as the present case is concerned it reveals that there was a
love affair on the promise of marriage she was subjected for
forceful sexual assault and at the time of first incident of sexual
relationship she was below 18 years of age. Thus, in view of the
stand taken by the Union of India before the Apex Court and
considering the fact that the Victim was below 18 years of age
at the time of marriage as well as when she was subjected for
physical relationship. At this stage, the Application deserves to
be rejected.
13. In view of the above observation, as the consent of
the minor is irrelevant and the stand taken by the Central
Government before the Hon'ble Apex Court also shows that it
would be against the mandate of the Constitution of India, as
law is not for the individuals but for society at large.
11 945.APL.671-2022..JUDGMENT.odt
14. In the light of the above object behind the
enactment of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,
the Application deserves to be rejected. In view of that we
proceed to pass the following order.
ORDER
i. Criminal Application is rejected.
15. Rule is discharged.
16. Fees of the learned Appointed Counsel be quantified
as per rules.
17. Pending application/s, if any, shall stand disposed of
accordingly.
(NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.) (URMILA JOSHI PHALKE, J.)
S.D.Bhimte
Signed by: Mr.S.D.Bhimte
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 20/11/2025 17:49:15
