The Supreme Court on Friday denied bail to an accused of raping a minor girl. The apex court remarked that “Are you entitled to commit a sexual offense against even a major? Even if she is Minor or Major, are you entitled?.”
The accused submitted that the minor party was a consenting party. This remark of the Supreme Court came while hearing a special leave petition filed by the accused challenging the order of Rajasthan High Court. The bench headed by Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice Hima Kohli, Justice Surya Kant refuses to grant bail in said case.
The petitioner established sexual relationships with a girl who is of 16 years of age, as per the accused. As per the father of the girl, she is 14 years old. The counsel appearing on behalf of the accused cited some views prevailing in the High Court to support his contention that the minor girl was a consenting party.
The bench further asked the accused, as to whether he wants to argue that she was a consenting party or was she capable of giving consent?
To which the counsel replied that she was 16 years and 1 month old as per her school’s record. The counsel contended that in a similar case the Himachal Pradesh High Court granted bail where the girl was 16 years old.
Justice Surya Kant opined that “We are not concerned with the High Court, our views are very clear and consistent on this issue.”
“You unnecessarily complicate the case. You rape a girl, a minor and 3 months later you want bail?” CJI said.
“Are you entitled to commit sexual offenses against even a minor? Even if she is Minor or Major, are you entitled?” CJI remarked.
Later on, when the counsel tried to argue further the CJI dismissed the case and refused to hear any arguments further.
“Dismissed. Don’t argue! Or we will impose costs, you’re willing to pay?” CJI said.
