Gujarat High Court quashes rape case against 10-year-old, directs deletion of his name from records

The Gujarat High Court on Wednesday quashed a rape case which was registered in 2010 against a boy aged ten and a half years.

Justice JC Doshi opined that that police official, who registered the First Information Report (FIR), must not have been aware about Section 83 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which grants immunity to the children aged more than 7 years and under 12 years, who may not have sufficient maturity to understand the consequences of their actions.

"The FIR itself records that the petitioner was 11 years old at the time of incident. It is not the case of the prosecution that forensic test was carried out at the relevant time that whether the petitioner was though 11 years old at the time of alleged incident, was mature enough to understand the consequences of the alleged act. According to this Court, the PI, Bhaktinagar Police Station must not have knowledge of section 83 of the IPC or filing of FIR is in defiance of section 83 of the IPC," the Court ruled.

The single-judge proceeded to quash the FIR and also ordered deletion of his name from the police and court records.

The High Court registry was also directed to anonymise the case title of the present case and delete his name from the computer records.

"The concerned investigating officer as well as learned trial Court is directed to remove / delete name of the petitioner from the police records, investigation papers as well as Court records to protect identity of the petitioner," the Court ordered.

According to the case record, the victim had said that the accused was instigated by his mother when they were playing the game 'doctor doctor'. The victim was six and a half years old.

The accused approached the High Court in 2013 with a petition seeking quashing of the FIR. It was argued that the police was required to establish that the child understood his actions before initiating prosecution against him. The same had not been done, the Court was told.

In response to the plea, the respondents, particularly the complainant side, argued that the accused had committed a serious crime and there was a presumption of his maturity.

However, the High Court in 2014 had stayed the prosecution against the accused during the pendency of the quashing plea.

"In absence of the foundation of the petitioner's psyche as on the date of the commission of the alleged evidence, no presumption prima facie would arise against the petitioner under Section 83 of I.P.C. The petitioner has thus made out a strong case for stay of his prosecution. Under the circumstances, the trial and proceedings against the petitioner arising out of First Information Report being I-C.R.No. 8 of 2010 registered with Mahila Police Station, District Rajkot, is stayed till final hearing of this petition," the Court had ordered then.

The petition was allowed on Wednesday.

Advocate Virat G Popat represented the accused.

Advocate Tarjani K Anjaria represented the complainant.

Advocate Chintan Dave represented the prosecution.

[Read Judgment]