Conviction for Kidnapping and Abduction Set Aside, Minor’s Consent Deemed Irrelevant
In a significant judgment on May 4, 2026, the Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of Suhail under Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for the rape of a minor, while setting aside convictions under Sections 363 and 366 IPC relating to kidnapping and abduction. The court emphasized that the consent of a minor is immaterial in law, thereby affirming the trial court's finding of guilt for repeated sexual assault.
The case dates back to January 20, 2014, when Suhail allegedly kidnapped a minor girl from her lawful guardianship and took her to Rampur, U.P., where he committed repeated sexual assaults. The trial court had initially convicted Suhail under Sections 363, 366, and 376(2)(n) IPC, sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment and fines.
Justice Chandrasekharan Sudha, presiding over the appeal, scrutinized the evidence presented, particularly the testimony of the victim (PW1) and her birth certificate. The court found that the victim's age was established as 15 years and 6 months at the time of the offense, thus rendering any purported consent legally irrelevant under Section 375 IPC.
The court noted inconsistencies in the victim's testimony regarding kidnapping and abduction, leading to the acquittal of Suhail on those charges. The victim admitted to voluntarily accompanying Suhail, undermining the prosecution's case of coercion. However, the court upheld the conviction for rape, relying on the testimony that confirmed repeated sexual intercourse, regardless of the victim's claim of force.
The defense argued against the reliability of the birth certificate, suggesting the victim might have been of age based on her menarche. However, the court dismissed this claim, affirming the birth certificate's validity under Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015.
While addressing procedural lapses, the court concluded that the accused was adequately informed of the charges related to the victim's age during his examination, thereby dismissing claims of prejudice to his defense.
This judgment reinforces legal principles concerning minors' consent in sexual offenses, highlighting the judiciary's commitment to protecting children's rights under the Indian Penal Code and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
Bottom line:-
Consent of a minor is immaterial in law under Section 376 IPC. Accused's conviction under Sections 363 and 366 IPC was set aside due to doubts on evidence, but conviction under Section 376(2)(n) IPC was upheld as the victim was a minor at the time of the offence.
Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n), Criminal Procedure Code Sections 313(1)(b), 232, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 6, Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 Section 94.
