The Delhi High Court has ruled that mere friendship does not entitle a person to engage in sexual activity without consent, particularly when the victim is a minor, as it denied bail to a man accused of repeatedly raping a teenage girl under the guise of friendship.
Justice Girish Kathpalia, delivering the order on Thursday, dismissed the bail application of the accused who was booked last year under Sections 376 (rape), 354D (stalking), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code, along with relevant provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
The accused had argued that the girl, whom he befriended, was a consenting adult. The Delhi Police, however, opposed the bail, citing the gravity of the charges and the age of the victim.
Rejecting the defence’s arguments, Justice Kathpalia noted, “Even the consent would not be lawful in the present case because the prosecutrix was a minor. As specifically stated by the prosecutrix in the FIR as well as her testimony, the accused repeatedly indulged in sexual intercourse with her despite her objections.”
The judge further emphasized that, “Merely because a girl befriends a boy, the latter cannot be given liberty to indulge in sexual intercourse with her without her consent.”
The ruling aligns with the government’s recent stand in the Supreme Court opposing any relaxation in the age of consent under the POCSO Act, especially in the context of adolescent relationships. In submissions made in a public interest litigation filed by advocate Nipun Saxena, the Centre argued that any dilution of the statutory age threshold—“even in the name of reform or adolescent autonomy”—would compromise the safety net designed to protect minors and could inadvertently facilitate child abuse.
The government strongly advocated for the retention of 18 years as the minimum age of consent, citing the need for a consistent and robust framework to safeguard children’s rights and welfare.
This case and the court’s observations underline the judiciary’s firm stance on upholding the protective intent of child safety laws, particularly in the face of rising concerns over misuse under the guise of consensual adolescent relationships.
