Consensual relationships cannot be criminalized unless the promise was false from the inception.

Madras High Court Overturns POCSO Conviction Based on Unconstitutional Application. Court finds conviction under POCSO Act invalid as alleged crime occurred before Act's enforcement, highlights consensual relationship

In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court has set aside the conviction of Sathish Kumar under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, citing unconstitutional application due to the alleged incident occurring before the Act was enforced. The judgment, delivered by Justice G. Arul Murugan, underscores the importance of adhering to constitutional mandates regarding ex post facto laws and emphasizes the distinction between consensual relationships and criminal offenses under false promises of marriage.

The case involved Sathish Kumar, who was initially convicted by the trial court for offenses under the POCSO Act, following allegations that he engaged in a sexual relationship with a minor on the promise of marriage. The alleged incidents occurred in August 2012, while the POCSO Act came into effect only on November 14, 2012. The High Court's ruling pointed out that the conviction violated Article 20(1) of the Indian Constitution, which prohibits the conviction for acts that were not offenses at the time of their commission.

Justice Murugan noted discrepancies and inconsistencies in the victim's statements regarding the dates of occurrence and highlighted that the prolonged relationship between the parties was consensual. The court found no evidence of forceful sexual assault or a false promise to marry from the inception, thus rendering the charges under Sections 376 and 417 of the Indian Penal Code unsustainable.

The judgment also critiqued the trial court's alteration of charges to include Section 6 of the POCSO Act, despite the lack of evidence available at the time of alteration, and the absence of a charge under Section 5(l) of the Act. The High Court emphasized the need for charges to be substantiated by clear and cogent evidence.

Legal experts have hailed the judgment for its adherence to constitutional principles and the protection of individual rights. The ruling serves as a precedent for cases involving consensual relationships and the application of laws retrospectively. The court's decision also highlighted the necessity for legal systems to differentiate between consensual relationships and criminal acts, particularly in cases involving allegations of false promises of marriage.

The appellant, Sathish Kumar, has been acquitted of all charges, and the fine amount paid, if any, will be refunded. The court also decided that the victim compensation paid need not be disturbed, acknowledging the complex nature of the case and the circumstances involved.

Bottom Line:

Conviction under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) is unconstitutional if the alleged incident occurred before the Act came into force. Consensual relationships cannot be criminalized solely based on a promise to marry unless the promise was false from the inception.

Statutory provision(s): 

- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 5(l) r/w Section 6

- Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 376, Section 417

- Constitution of India, Article 20(1)

- Evidence Act, 1872

- Criminal Procedure Code, Section 207, Section 313, Section 216

The judgment reiterates the importance of constitutional safeguards and careful judicial scrutiny in cases involving allegations of sexual offenses, especially those complicated by consensual relationships and promises of marriage.

Sathish Kumar v. Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, (Madras) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2805147