In a ruling that has sparked renewed debate over judicial handling of sexual assault cases involving minors, the Bombay High Court last week granted bail to a 25-year-old man accused of raping a 15-year-old girl, observing that the facts indicated she had voluntarily stayed with him and had the “sufficient knowledge and capacity to know the full import” of her actions. The court also noted that the girl’s family was aware of the relationship.

Justice Milind N Jadhav passed the order on April 9, granting bail to the man who had been in custody since May 2021. He was booked under sections of the Indian Penal Code for kidnapping and rape, along with relevant provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. 

According to a report in The Indian Express, the first information report (FIR) was lodged in August 2020, alleging that the girl had left her home in July that year and failed to return. Her father had initially approached the accused, who denied any knowledge of her whereabouts. Two days later, the girl informed her father she was at the man’s native place in another state.

In May 2021, after over ten months of staying away from home, the girl—then around 15 years and 3 months old—revealed she was pregnant and claimed the man had refused to marry her. She was subsequently brought back to Maharashtra.

In her statement, the girl told authorities that she had known the accused since 2019 and that they had developed a relationship with mutual consent. She said they had physical relations in March 2020, before the nationwide Covid-19 lockdown, and again in July 2020 during their stay outside Maharashtra, which resulted in her pregnancy. She also mentioned that her parents disapproved of their relationship.

The accused’s lawyer, Mateen Qureshi, argued that the girl stayed with his client of her own volition for nearly ten months without lodging any complaint of coercion or abuse, and claimed that the father had made no attempt to retrieve her despite being aware of her location, raising doubts about the prosecution's version.

The court observed that the man had been in jail for nearly three years with little progress in the trial and noted the prolonged incarceration as one of the grounds for granting bail.

The judgment comes around the same time as a controversial decision by the Allahabad High Court, which granted bail to a man accused of raping a college student. The court had stirred outrage by observing that the victim had “invited trouble” and was “responsible” for what had transpired — remarks that drew sharp criticism from legal experts and women’s rights activists across the country.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court on Tuesday expressed disapproval of the Allahabad High Court's order. While acknowledging the court's authority to grant bail, Justice BR Gavai questioned the necessity of such remarks, emphasizing the importance of judges being cautious with their language and adopting a sensitive approach.