#Consensual Relationships

Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) granted bail to a married accused in a POCSO case despite the victim being a 17-year-old minor, holding she had attained the age of discretion and her conduct indicated consensual involvement. The court emphasized the 15-hour FIR delay, lack of forceful evidence, and the victim's contradictory statements as critical factors in bail jurisprudence.

The Kerala High Court has ruled that consensual sexual relations based on a promise of marriage do not automatically constitute an offence under BNS Section 69. The court emphasized that criminal liability arises only when there is clear evidence of deceitful intent to exploit, not mere broken promises - a critical threshold protecting genuine relationships from misuse of criminal law.

The Karnataka High Court has ruled that consensual sexual relations between a 19-year-old and a 16-year-9-month-old victim, absent coercion or exploitation, cannot by themselves justify denial of bail under Section 439 CrPC. This sets a critical precedent for pre-trial liberty in POCSO cases where age proximity and lack of force challenge blanket assumptions about risk and culpability.

Madras High Court quashes proceedings under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 69 where the accused and complainant married post-filing, holding that continued prosecution serves no public interest in consensual adult relationships. The ruling reinforces judicial discretion to prevent abuse of process in cases resolved amicably.

Madhya Pradesh High Court grants bail in POCSO case where alleged relationship was consensual, no forensic evidence exists, and parties have settled. Key bail principles clarified.