Allahabad High Court Acquits Appellant in Kidnapping and Rape Case
Court Finds No Evidence of Enticement or Force, Upholds Marriage Under Muslim Personal Law
In a landmark judgment, the Allahabad High Court has acquitted Islam alias Paltoo, the appellant, of charges under Sections 363, 366, and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, citing a lack of evidence of enticement or force and recognizing the validity of a marriage conducted under Muslim personal law. The judgment was delivered on September 19, 2025, by Justice Anil Kumar-X.
The case revolves around an incident from 2005, where the appellant was accused of enticing and kidnapping a 16-year-old girl, subsequently marrying her and engaging in a physical relationship. The prosecution alleged that the victim was taken away forcibly and subjected to repeated rape. However, the defense argued that the victim willingly left with the appellant, married him as per Muslim customs, and that their relationship was consensual.
The court scrutinized the testimonies of the victim and witnesses. It noted that the victim’s statements did not indicate any force or manipulation by the appellant. Instead, the evidence suggested that the victim left of her own volition and willingly engaged in the marriage and subsequent relationship. The court emphasized that under Muslim personal law, the marriage was valid as the victim was above the presumed age of puberty, which is 15.
Significantly, the court referred to the Supreme Court’s judgment in the Independent Thought case, which struck down the exception in Section 375 IPC that allowed sexual intercourse with a wife aged between 15 and 18. However, it was acknowledged that the judgment had prospective effect, and thus did not apply to this case, which occurred prior to the Supreme Court's decision.
The judgment also highlighted the failure of the prosecution to establish the essential components of "taking" or "enticing" as required under Section 361 IPC. The evidence did not demonstrate any active inducement by the appellant to lure the victim away from her lawful guardian, leading to the conclusion that charges under Sections 363 and 366 IPC were not substantiated.
The court concluded by setting aside the trial court's conviction and directing the appellant to furnish a bail bond under Section 437A of the CrPC.
Bottom Line:
The appellant was acquitted of charges under Sections 363, 366, and 376 IPC as the prosecution failed to prove that the victim was "enticed" or "taken" by the appellant, and the physical relationship occurred after their marriage, which was solemnized as per Muslim personal law.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 361, 363, 366, 376 of the Indian Penal Code; Section 164, 313, 437A of the Criminal Procedure Code; Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006; Muslim Personal Law; Exception 2 of Section 375 IPC (struck down prospectively).
Islam @ Paltoo v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2781296
