Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court is the apex judicial authority in the National Capital Territory of Delhi, established under the Indian Constitution. It serves as an essential appellate court overseeing civil and criminal matters and holds original jurisdiction in certain cases, thereby playing a significant role in the administration of justice within the region. With a sanctioned strength of 45 permanent judges and an additional 15 judges, it functions as a critical institution ensuring the enforcement and interpretation of laws applicable to Delhi, directly influencing the balance of power within India's legal framework. Recently, the Delhi High Court has gained attention for addressing diverse legal issues, from high-profile judicial decisions to procedural reforms aimed at managing its growing caseload more efficiently. Noteworthy cases, such as those involving significant cultural and heritage debates or challenges to government policies, underscore the court's influence on both societal norms and legal precedents. Additionally, the court's active role in mandating dress codes for advocates and proposing updates to procedural rules exemplifies its commitment to maintaining decorum and efficiency in legal proceedings. As legal professionals and the general public seek information and updates regarding latest Delhi High Court judgments, case statuses, and insights on engaging with high court advocates in Delhi, the court remains a pivotal element of the Indian judiciary. Its functions extend beyond mere adjudication; the Delhi High Court is actively shaping the future of legal practice and interpretation, thereby ensuring the rule of law remains robust in one of the country's most dynamic regions.
What did the Delhi High Court rule regarding consensual adolescent relationships under the POCSO Act?
The Delhi High Court observed that it would be harsh and unjust to convict individuals under the POCSO Act without definitive proof of age, especially when the age difference between the minor and the accused is only one or two years. Justice Jasmeet Singh emphasized that criminalizing consensual adolescent relationships with minimal age gaps could lead to miscarriage of justice. However, the Court clarified that this principle would not apply in cases where the minor is under 14 or 15 years old, as the age gap in such situations is significantly larger. The ruling recognizes the importance of balancing child protection with a nuanced understanding of adolescent development and relationships.
Watch clip answer (00:38m)
WION
01:08 - 01:46
What was the basis of the Delhi High Court's ruling regarding a POCSO Act case?
The Delhi High Court upheld a trial court's acquittal of a man under Section 4 of POCSO Act 2012, dismissing the prosecution's appeal. Justice Jasmeet Singh noted that the prosecutrix had clearly stated in her testimony that the relationship and physical relations with the accused were consensual. The court further emphasized that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the prosecutrix was a minor at the time of the incident. This ruling reflects the court's position that adolescents should be allowed to engage in consensual romantic relationships without criminalization, recognizing such relationships as a natural part of human development.
Watch clip answer (00:49m)WION
01:46 - 02:36
What does the Delhi High Court say about adolescent romantic relationships?
The Delhi High Court has ruled that adolescents should be allowed to engage in romantic and consensual relationships without fear of criminalization. Justice Jasmeet Singh emphasized that consensual adolescent love is a natural part of human development, describing it as a fundamental human experience. While acknowledging the importance of legal age of consent for protecting minors, the Court stated that laws should focus on preventing exploitation and abuse rather than punishing consensual relationships. The ruling advocates for societal and legal views to evolve to respect adolescents' rights to form emotional connections that are free from coercion.
Watch clip answer (01:07m)WION
00:00 - 01:08
What is the POCSO Act and what protections does it provide?
The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act 2012 was enacted by the Government of India to safeguard children from sexual abuse and offenses. The act clearly defines a child as any person below 18 years of age and provides punishments based on the gravity of the offense committed. The POCSO Act was further reviewed and amended in 2019 to introduce more stringent punishments, including the death penalty for sexual crimes against children. These amendments were implemented with the specific aim of deterring perpetrators and preventing such crimes against children through harsher penalties.
Watch clip answer (00:33m)WION
02:36 - 03:10
What was the Delhi High Court's ruling on adolescent relationships?
The Delhi High Court ruled that adolescents should be allowed to engage in consensual romantic relationships without fear of criminalization. Justice Jasmeet Singh emphasized that such relationships are a natural part of human development, stating that love is a fundamental human experience and adolescents have the right to form emotional connections. The Court observed that legal and societal views should prioritize the rights of young individuals to engage in relationships that are free from exploitation and abuse. The ruling suggests that the law should evolve to acknowledge and respect these relationships, as long as they are consensual and not coercive, marking a significant shift toward recognizing adolescent autonomy in romantic matters.
Watch clip answer (00:55m)
WION
00:00 - 00:55
What did the Delhi High Court observe about convicting individuals under the POCSO Act when there is a small age difference?
The Delhi High Court observed that it would be harsh and unjust to convict an individual under the POCSO Act without definitive proof of age, especially when the age difference between the minor victim and the accused is minimal - only one or two years. Justice Jasmeet Singh emphasized that such prosecution could be unreasonable in cases involving adolescents in consensual romantic relationships with small age gaps. The ruling suggests a more nuanced approach is needed when applying the POCSO Act to avoid criminalizing young people engaged in age-appropriate relationships.
Watch clip answer (00:21m)WION
01:08 - 01:29