<p>The High Court has refused bail in a case of abduction and rape under the Pocso Act, wherein the victim had filed an affidavit stating that she had gone out with the accused voluntarily and had married him.</p>.<p>Refusing to take the affidavit of the victim as her consent for granting bail, the court noted that it is against the law to consider a minor girl’s ‘no objection’ statement.</p>.<p>The accused was arrested for abduction and rape of a 15-year-old girl based on the complaint by the victim’s mother.</p>.<p>The court observed that the offences involved in the case are under sections 4 and 6 of Pocso Act and sections 9 and 10 of the Child Marriage Restraint Act.</p>.<p>The court noted that the victim in her statement under section 164 of CrPC had categorically stated the accused had threatened her and took her to his first wife’s house.</p>.<p>Justice K Natarajan said that the statement under section 164 CrPC is foremost important for considering the bail petition and granting bail to the accused on the basis of a 'no objection' by the minor victim is nothing but giving licence to the offender to commit similar offences.</p>.<p>“Therefore, in the interest of the public at large and with an intention to curtail such type of sexual offences, the court shall ignore the consent of a minor girl giving 'no objection' for granting bail to the accused and the court should deal with such an heinous offence with an iron hand,” the court said.</p>.<p>The petitioner (accused in the case) contended that they had eloped and even registered their marriage.</p>.<p>The court noted that the marriage certificate, issued by the secretary of a mosque, entered the age of the victim as 19 years. The court said though second marriage is permissible under the Mohammedan Law, the personal law cannot override the Special Law of Pocso, Child Marriage Restraints Act and General Penal Code.</p>
<p>The High Court has refused bail in a case of abduction and rape under the Pocso Act, wherein the victim had filed an affidavit stating that she had gone out with the accused voluntarily and had married him.</p>.<p>Refusing to take the affidavit of the victim as her consent for granting bail, the court noted that it is against the law to consider a minor girl’s ‘no objection’ statement.</p>.<p>The accused was arrested for abduction and rape of a 15-year-old girl based on the complaint by the victim’s mother.</p>.<p>The court observed that the offences involved in the case are under sections 4 and 6 of Pocso Act and sections 9 and 10 of the Child Marriage Restraint Act.</p>.<p>The court noted that the victim in her statement under section 164 of CrPC had categorically stated the accused had threatened her and took her to his first wife’s house.</p>.<p>Justice K Natarajan said that the statement under section 164 CrPC is foremost important for considering the bail petition and granting bail to the accused on the basis of a 'no objection' by the minor victim is nothing but giving licence to the offender to commit similar offences.</p>.<p>“Therefore, in the interest of the public at large and with an intention to curtail such type of sexual offences, the court shall ignore the consent of a minor girl giving 'no objection' for granting bail to the accused and the court should deal with such an heinous offence with an iron hand,” the court said.</p>.<p>The petitioner (accused in the case) contended that they had eloped and even registered their marriage.</p>.<p>The court noted that the marriage certificate, issued by the secretary of a mosque, entered the age of the victim as 19 years. The court said though second marriage is permissible under the Mohammedan Law, the personal law cannot override the Special Law of Pocso, Child Marriage Restraints Act and General Penal Code.</p>
