The Goa Bench of Bombay High Court confirms the conviction of Shobhit Kumar for kidnapping and rape of a minor, emphasizing the invalidity of consent under 18 in sexual offences.
In a significant ruling, the Goa Bench of the Bombay High Court upheld the conviction of Shobhit Kumar, who was charged with the kidnapping and rape of a minor under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The judgment, delivered by Justice Shreeram V. Shirsat, emphasized that any consent by a minor below the age of 18 is immaterial in cases of sexual offences, thereby affirming the lower court's decision.
The case originated from an incident where the appellant, Shobhit Kumar, was accused of enticing a 16-year-old girl, leading to her leaving her lawful guardian's custody. The victim's mother had reported her missing, suspecting that her daughter had been kidnapped after she failed to return from a nearby grocery store. The investigation led to Kumar's arrest, and he was subsequently charged under Sections 363 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.
The High Court scrutinized the evidence, including testimonies from the victim and medical examinations, which corroborated the charges of kidnapping and sexual assault. Justice Shirsat noted that the victim's testimony was consistent and supported by medical evidence, which indicated signs of sexual assault. The court dismissed the appellant's argument of a consensual relationship, reiterating that the victim's consent, being a minor, was legally invalid.
The court's decision reaffirmed the stringent protection offered to minors under the POCSO Act, highlighting that the Act was designed to safeguard children from sexual exploitation and abuse, irrespective of any perceived consent.
This judgment also drew attention to the procedural aspects of the investigation, with the appellant's counsel arguing that the investigation was flawed. However, the court found no merit in these claims, concluding that the procedural lapses did not affect the outcome as the evidence against the appellant was overwhelming.
The ruling is a reminder of the legal stance that minors cannot legally consent to sexual activities, thereby ensuring stringent measures against those exploiting minors. The judgment underscores the judiciary's role in upholding the provisions of the POCSO Act, reinforcing the protection of children from sexual offences.
Bottom Line:
POCSO Act - Consent of minor immaterial for sexual intercourse - Even if a minor voluntarily engages in sexual intercourse, it does not constitute valid consent under the law.
Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code Sections 361, 363, 375, 376; Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Sections 2(d), 4, 29.
Shobhit Kumar v. State, (Bombay)(Goa Bench) : Law Finder Doc id # 2859700
