Forced Marriage as a Means of Avoiding Responsibility for a Sexual Offense

 Forced Marriage as a Means of Avoiding Responsibility for a

Sexual Offense

In the most recent ruling, the Nagpur Judge of the Bombay High Court in Satish v. state of

Maharashtra stated that sexual assault without undress and or skin-to-skin contact does not

constitute a violation of Section 7 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act, 2012

(POSCO Act), which is dated January 19, 2021. The Indian Penal Code's Section 354 applies instead.

This decision has drawn fierce criticism and received a censure from the Supreme Court, which

suspended its implementation.

The Himachal Pradesh High Court granted bail to a married man accused of committing a sexual

offence by having intercourse with a 16-year-old girl in the case of Virendra Singh v. State of H.P. Bail

was granted because the accused consented to marry the girl, and the court concluded that there

was a mutual attraction between them. Similar to this, the Supreme Court recently demanded that a

guy who had raped a young girl marry her in order to obtain bail and keep his job. Another case

where the accused was given relief on bind Rakhi is Aparna Bhat v. State of Madhya Pradesh, in

which a lawyer argued before the Supreme Court to enable women to bind Rakhi and exonerate the

accused of the crime of sexual assault.

Are all sexual offences against children prohibited by marriage?

In a modern culture, it is inappropriate to allow someone accused of sexual assault to wed the

alleged victim and to claim marriage as a defence against criminal responsibility. According to the

POSCO Act's requirements, sexual offences against children are considered evil crimes, and marrying

the victim in order to use bail defeats the victim rearrangement aim. According to the POSCO Act's

requirements, sexual offences against children are considered evil crimes, and marrying the victim in

order to use bail defeats the victim rearrangement aim. It causes the victim unjustifiable pain since

they are forced to deal with the consequences of a crime that significantly unfairly affects them. Any

subsequent rape of the victim after the victim is married is permissible on the pretext of marital rape

and is not punishable under Indian law. One must wonder who will support and provide for the

man's minor wife if the court sentences him to incarceration in the final judgement. The victim may

be forced to give up seeking justice in any way due to the emotional anguish. Above all, a submissive

lady is the description of a good wife in Indian weddings. The nice lady in a patriarchal Indian

marriage endures silently and is forgiving of all the abuse.

There are a few glaring issues with the Madhya Pradesh example that was previously given. The

accused has a history of marriage, to start. In many ways, asking him to take the young victim as a

wife is against Indian law and government social policies. Second, the second marriage is declared

void by the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955. It is also against the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act 2006.

When a marriage occurs before the age of 18, according to UNICEF, It is regarded as a breach of

human rights.

This mindset is depressing to witness, but district collectors and SDMs have implemented a number

of programmes to discourage families from having children, including counselling services and

societal intervention. when the Hon’ble Courts come out with rulings that permit bail on marrying

the victim, nonetheless of age and mess, it fails the advancement of being made by such local level

administrative acts.

Conclusion

The legislature has stated that it wants to raise the age at which women can be married. This

suggests that people are worried about early marriage and how it may affect our nation's economic

and socio-legal system.

A criminological perspective will shed light on the nature of the penalties for the crime against

minors. The Juvenile Justice Act of 2000 is widely criticised for being in opposition to the POSCO's

provisions. Even so, the difference is not as significant as it might appear. The Juvenile Justice Act

places a strong emphasis on rehabilitation and is classified as a reformatory jail. Instead, POSCO is

governed by severe rules that serve as a deterrent to offenders. These two pieces of legislation are

related and both aim to protect children's welfare.