Title: This case highlighted the need of the hour to decrease the age of consent from 18 years to

16 years of the prosecutrix in IPC.

Case Name: Rahul Chandel Jatav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh and another

Citation: Misc.Criminal Case No.24691 of 2023

Court: Honorable High Court of Madhya Pradesh Gwalior

Judge: Honorable Justice Shri Deepak Kumar Garhwal

Decided on: 27 th June 2023

Case Laws:

• Shri John Franklin Sylla v State Of Maharatra

and other. Crl. Petition No.3 of 2003

• State Of Rajasthan v Tarun Vaisahav And

another Crl. No.1890/2023

• Vijaylaxmi And Another V state Crl. O.P No.232 of 2021

Brief facts of the case:

1. The prosecutrix alleged that the complainant has done sexual harassment repeatedly and

assaulted her and made a private video of hers through which he blackmailed her.

2. Prosecutrix used to attend coaching classes at Yadav Bhawan.

3. On 18.01.2020 the Prosecutrix went to the classes at 7 A.M in the Morning and there was

no one there at the classes so the complainant spiked her juice which left her in

unconscious state.

4. Complainant committed sexual intercourse with her and made a video of the same.

5. He blackmailed her that he will viral the video hers done sexual intercourse many times

even at her house.

6. When the prosecutrix got pregnant in the month of April the complainant gave her some

medications for the termination of the pregnancy.

7. She also know Mukesh chokhotia for last 4 years her classmate and a distant relative in

2016 in pretext of marriage he many he made physical relationship with her.

8. Mukesh said that any relationship which is physical was been made with her consent.

Issue:

Petition was filed under section 482 of C.R P.C for quashing the Fir registered

against Rahul Jadav and Mukesh chokhotia. These incidents also attracted the

Pocso Act.

 The learned counsel on the behalf of Mukesh chokhotia said that any intercourse

was done with the consent of the girl and there is no case can be made under the

POCSO Act hence requested to quash the consequential proceedings as well as

the FIR.

 Ratio:  

The court had taken into consideration facts of two cases which have mentioned

in case laws. The court has considered the following statements-

 That she was minor at the time of incident but nowadays adolescents know the results of

her action hence she can be given her consent wilfully with Mukesh Chokhotia.

 Due to social media the male and female of the age of 14 years is getting puberty in a

early age.

 That is the reason the law makers in the IPC changed the age to 16 years .

 Due to hormonal changes girls and boys of this age make friends and hence the make

physical relationship. And then the boy is treated like a criminal in the society.

 Most of criminal cases in which prosecutrix is under 18 years of age injustice is going on

with adolescent boys.

Held:

 Hence the court allows M.C.Crc stands allowed and disposed off.