Consent of minor is no consent at all: HC

Aurangabad: Justice Vibha Kankanwadi of the Aurangabad bench of the Bombay high court, recently while rejecting the criminal appeal of a convict arrested under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act, 2012, said that consent of a

minor

is no consent at all.

The convict — Maula Babu Kotwal (31), a resident of Shirol in Akkalkot taluka of Solapur — in 2017 was sentenced to five-year imprisonment in two offences and 10-year rigorous imprisonment under Pocso by a special judge (Osmanabad). He had committed the crime in 2015 and was arrested under section 363, 366 (A), 376 (2) (i) of the Indian Penal Code along with section 6 of the Pocso Act.

Kotwal had approached the high court pointing out that he had sex with a minor (then 15) with her consent and had pleaded to show leniency on ground that he has already served 6 years in prison. The convict (then 28) was staying with the family of the minor in Osmanabad district.

The convict had taken the girl first to Mumbai and then to Tuljapur where she was raped. The convict was held from Tuljapur. While dismissing the appeal the curt remarked: “Here in this case, the accused has not produced any reliable evidence, rather he is accepting the fact that the victim is minor and he had sexual intercourse with her. The only defence he tries to give is that, the act was done with the consent of the minor, when in fact consent of minor is no consent at all. Hence, the findings as well as conviction of the appellant deserves to be confirmed.’’

The court added: “It has been alternatively submitted on behalf of the appellant that he has already undergone six years of imprisonment, and therefore, his conviction be reduced to the period he has already undergone. At the outset, it can be said that, no reasons have been stated by the learned advocate for the appellant in his submissions as to why the sentence should be reduced. Merely because the accused was 28-year-old at the time of incident, no leniency can be shown when he is committing such a heinous crime against a child.”

Justice Kankanwadi went on to state that the case needs to be treated where the appellant has committed the rape of a minor girl which is regarded as a heinous crime.

“Such an act of sexual assault has to be abhorred. If the consent of a minor is treated as a mitigating circumstance, it may lead to disastrous consequences. This view of ours gets strengthened when we keep in mind the letter and spirit behind Pocso Act,” she said.