While holding thus, Justice Jasmeet Singh differentiated the present case from his order in another matter wherein he had held that a Muslim man can be charged under the POCSO Act for having sexual intercourse with a minor girl who had attained puberty.
The judge said that two cases are different since in the previous matter, there was exploitation of the child as sexual relationship was established prior to marriage and after establishing the physical relationship, the accused had refused to marry the prosecutrix.
“On the other hand, in the present case, it is not a case of exploitation but a case where the petitioners were in love, got married according to the Muslim laws, and thereafter, had physical relationship,” the Court said.
The judge added,
“It is also clear from the status report that the parties were living with each other husband and wife. There is no averment that they had sexual intercourse prior to their marriage. In fact, the status report is suggestive of the fact that they were married on 11.03.2022, and thereafter, established physical relationship.”
Source: Barandbench
