Delhi High Court: In an appeal filed under Section 374(2) read with Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (‘CrPC’) to set aside the judgment and order on sentence dated 28-04-2023, Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.*, opined that the consequences of such acts extended beyond the individual victims; they cause ripples through society by pulling these girls away from their pear groups, studies and their lawful guardianship. When a girl was forced to abandon her education due to such incidents, it caused a profound setback not only to an individual but to the society as a whole. Creating a safe and supportive environment for girls to pursue their education was a collective responsibility that extended beyond individual incidents, criminal cases and victims. Thus, the Court opined that the impugned judgment dated 29-03-2023, passed by the Trial Court was based on based on correct facts, appreciation of evidence and the judicial precedents, thus, it had no reason to interfere with the impugned or to take a lenient view and interfere with the sentence awarded to the appellant vide order on sentence dated 28-04-2023.
Background
On 27-10-2015, the complainant, who was the victim’s father filed a missing report of his daughter of about fourteen years and informed that on 26-10-2015 at about 7.30 pm, she went to her school, but later went missing. Further, on 07-12-2015, he received a call from the victim who informed him that the appellant-accused had kidnapped her and had kept her with him. The police conducted search and the victim and appellant were brought to the police station.
The victim’s statement was recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC wherein she alleged that she knew the appellant for last one year as he was residing in their neighbourhood, and he used to follow her and proposed her for marriage. Thereafter, the appellant and the victim started talking to each other. The victim’s parents came to know about it and used to beat her. Further, on 26-10-2015, the appellant took the victim with him from outside her school and they both started living together in a rented accommodation. The victim stated that he established physical relationship with her without her consent and when she refused, the appellant told her that since they were about to get married, there was no problem in establishing physical relations, and on this pretext, he used to establish physical relations with her daily. Thereafter, the appellant took her to Bihar, where both of them performed marriage and started living together as a husband and wife.
On 14-01-2016, the police recovered the victim and both were brought to the police station and further in her supplementary statement recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC, the victim informed that police that she and the appellant had been residing in a rented accommodation by changing their names on fake identities. Thus, Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (‘POCSO Act’) were also added in the FIR.
The Trial Court convicted the appellant under Sections 363 and 376(2)(n)(i) of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 2000 for the offence punishable under Section 6 of POCSO Act and undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 1000 for the offence punishable under Section 363 of the IPC.
Thus, the appellant filed the present appeal.
Analysis, Law, and Decision
The Court opined that the witnesses testimonies, oral and documentary evidence on record proved that the child victim was less than eighteen years of age at the time of the incident and she was fourteen years of age when physical relations were established for the first time by the appellant with the victim.
Further, with regard to the appellant’s contention that the appellant could not have known the victim’s age to be less than eighteen years as he was not carrying her Aadhar Card with her, the Court opined that it would be travesty of justice when Court would start giving weightage to an argument that a person who was kidnapping and sexually assaulting a minor was not aware of the victim’s age since she was not carrying her Aadhar Card with her. The Court also opined that the appellant was following the victim to the school and at the time of first establishing sexual relations, he was aware of the standard in which the victim was studying. Therefore, there was no occasion for the appellant to presume that the child was studying in 7th or 8th standard could be major.
The Court opined that the witnesses testimonies revealed that the appellant had planned to take the victim out of the lawful custody of her parents when she was going to attend her school and also, took her to Ajmer where he stayed in a hotel for some time. The Court also noted that the appellant was already married and had two children when he established physical relations with the minor victim and opined that it was disheartening to note that the appellant, even while being in a relationship with a fourteen-year-old-girl from the same locality was aware about his responsibility towards his wife and children, but he chose to establish physical relationship with the victim. This demonstrated that the appellant had completely forgotten about his lawfully married wife and his children who were his prime responsibility. Thus, the Court opined that it was not inclined to accept the appellant’s argument that he needed to take care of his family and lenient view should be taken while deciding the sentence awarded to him.
The Court opined that the disturbing fact about the present case was persuading the minor victim to leave her studies, to elope and marry him while the appellant was already married and had two children. The Court further opined that the rising incidents of kidnapping of minor girls who were subjected to sexual assault under the guise of marriage was witnessed. The impressionable minds of the minor victims were profoundly impacted, as they lacked the capacity to make informed decisions at such tender ages of twelve to fourteen.
The Court opined that “the consequences of such acts extend beyond the individual victims; they cause ripples through society by pulling these girls away from their pear groups, studies and their lawful guardianship. They are disengaged from their studies and are thus denied the opportunity to pursue the careers they might have otherwise chosen in case they would have continued with their studies. Thus, on the one hand, such incidents deprive females of the career opportunity and standing on their own feet and be educated, on the other, the psychological trauma continues for a lifetime.”
The Court further opined that when a girl was forced to abandon her education due to such incidents, it caused a profound setback not only to an individual but to the society as a whole. Education is rightly recognised as the fundamental pillar in discussions surrounding the empowerment of women, however, such incidents that forced a girl to abandon her studies, the very notion of empowerment was compromised and society at large bore the consequences. Creating a safe and supportive environment for girls to pursue their education was a collective responsibility that extended beyond individual incidents, criminal cases and victims.
Thus, the Court opined that the impugned judgment dated 29-03-2023, passed by the Trial Court was based on based on correct facts, appreciation of evidence and the judicial precedents, thus, it had no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment or to take a lenient view and interfere with the sentence awarded to the appellant vide order on sentence dated 28-04-2023.
[Mohd. Taslim Ali v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 SCC OnLine Del 7557, decided on 03-11-2023]
*Judgment authored by- Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Appellant: Mukesh Singh, Advocate;
For the Respondent: Naresh Kumar Chahar, APP for the State with SI Preeti Saini, P.S. Timarpur
Buy Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 HERE
Buy Penal Code, 1860 HERE
Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 HERE
