AlinaNon consensual intercourse with minor
Court Rules on Non-Consensual Intercourse with Minor
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court has emphasized that non-consensual intercourse with a minor wife constitutes rape under Indian law. The court upheld the conviction of a 24-year-old man sentenced to 10 years in prison for sexually assaulting his underage wife, dismissing his appeal against the 2021 judgment of a sessions court.
Background of the Case
The case, which was reviewed by the Nagpur bench led by Justice G A Sanap, revolved around an incident reported in 2019. According to the complainant, she was in a relationship with the accused before they married. She alleged that despite her refusal, the man raped and impregnated her. Although the couple eventually married and began living together, tensions escalated when the man insisted on an abortion.
Details of the Complaint
The woman, in her complaint, accused her husband of making a mockery of their marriage and subjecting her to repeated acts of rape and physical abuse. The matter reached the sessions court, where the man was found guilty under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) and relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). His appeal against this judgment led to the current high court proceedings.
The Accused’s Defense and High Court’s Response
The 24-year-old argued that since the complainant was his wife, their physical relationship should not be categorized as rape. He also claimed that the woman was not a minor at the time of the incident. However, the Bombay High Court rejected these defenses. Justice Sanap ruled that the defense of consensual relations does not hold when the wife is under 18 years of age.
The court underscored, “Sexual intercourse with a girl below 18 years of age is rape regardless of whether she is married or not. The non-consensual intercourse with a wife, who is below 18 years of age, is rape.”
Documentary Evidence and Court’s Findings
To solidify its decision, the court examined documentary evidence, including the complainant’s birth records, which confirmed that she was born in 2002. This made her a minor at the time of the alleged incidents in 2019. The DNA analysis further verified that the accused and the complainant were the biological parents of the child she gave birth to.
Legal Precedents and Implications
This ruling by the Bombay High Court reinforces the stance that the law views non-consensual intercourse with a minor as rape, irrespective of marital status. It highlights the importance of protecting minors under the POCSO Act and ensures that perpetrators cannot exploit marriage as a defense.
Such rulings align with the evolving understanding of child rights and the duty to protect minors from sexual exploitation and violence. This case sets a strong precedent for similar cases, underscoring that the age of the victim plays a critical role in determining consent and legality.
Reaffirmation of Minors’ Rights
The non-consensual intercourse with a minor case demonstrates that the court prioritizes the welfare and rights of minors, even within the framework of marriage. It sends a strong message that violating these rights leads to severe consequences.
Conclusion: Upholding Justice for Minors
The Bombay High Court’s ruling reaffirms that non-consensual intercourse with a minor wife constitutes rape, as outlined in the IPC and POCSO Act. This judgment emphasizes that no legal or social framework should undermine the protection owed to minors. As the legal system continues to uphold stringent standards, this case stands as a crucial reminder of the consequences faced by those who violate the rights of minors.
Disclaimer:
This content is for informational purposes only and does not serve as legal advice. For specific legal concerns, please consult with a qualified professional.
