Recently, a 20-year prison sentence in a POCSO case was set aside by the Chhattisgarh High Court after it found that the basic ingredients of kidnapping were not made out. The case involved a 15-year-old girl who had left home and travelled with a 24-year-old man, where the Court noted that voluntary companionship, in the absence of any inducement or coercion, cannot be treated as a criminal act. The findings bring into focus the need for a careful evaluation of conduct and evidence in cases involving minors, rather than proceeding on presumptions alone.
The prosecution's case originated from a missing persons complaint lodged by the father of a 15-year-old girl who had left home for school but did not return. Subsequent investigation revealed that she encountered the accused on the way and travelled with him across several cities, including Mungeli, Raipur, Hyderabad, Vijayawada, and eventually Agrapalli, where they stayed together for nearly a month. During this period, the two lived together and maintained a relationship akin to marriage. The State pressed that the girl’s minority rendered her consent legally insignificant, thereby justifying charges of kidnapping and offences under the POCSO Act. In contrast, the defence highlighted the girl’s own statements indicating that she had willingly accompanied the accused, remained with him throughout without raising any alarm, and had not attempted to return home at any stage, thereby negating the essential element of inducement.
The Court found no material to suggest that the accused had played any active role in persuading or compelling the girl to leave her home. It observed, “the victim had voluntarily accompanied the appellant and remained with him without any resistance or complaint,” making it clear that the foundational requirement of inducement for the offence of kidnapping was absent. The Court further noted that while allegations of a physical relationship were made, the medical examination did not reveal injuries, and the forensic report failed to support the prosecution’s case, creating reasonable doubt. In light of these evidentiary deficiencies, the Court concluded that the prosecution had failed to establish the charges beyond a reasonable doubt, and accordingly set aside the trial court’s conviction, acquitting the accused of all offences.
Disclaimer: This news/ article includes information received via a syndicated news feed. The original rights remain with the respective publisher.
Picture Source :
