Hamid Raza v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2025
Justice Monga’s observations suggest a need for nuanced interpretation where the minor is now an adult, affirming that state intervention must not infringe personal liberty unnecessarily.
Judgement Details
Court
Delhi High Court
Date of Decision
23 September 2025
Judges
Justice Arun Monga
Citation
Acts / Provisions
Section 13(1)(ia), Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
Section 25, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
Facts of the Case
-
Hamid Raza, aged 24, was booked under the POCSO Act based on a consensual relationship with a girl who was allegedly a minor at the time.
-
The relationship eventually culminated in marriage under Islamic Law, and the couple was blessed with a son.
-
The wife, now aged 20, appeared before the Court and stated that she was forcibly confined in a Child Welfare Centre along with her infant son, calling it a form of "imprisonment" without fault.
-
No formal complaint was filed by either party. Despite this, Hamid was in judicial custody since June 15, 2024, the date of FIR.
-
The prosecution's case rests on the technicality of age, as consent of a minor is irrelevant under POCSO.
Issues
-
Whether a consensual relationship that later results in marriage under personal law can still be treated as an offence under POCSO if the woman was a minor at the time of the relationship?
-
Whether continuing confinement of the woman and the arrest of her husband violates Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty)?
-
Whether interim bail is warranted in a case where no party claims to be a victim?
Held
-
The Court found sufficient grounds for interim bail, noting:
-
The consensual nature of the relationship.
-
Marriage under Islamic Law was legally recognised.
-
No actual complaint from the alleged victim.
-
-
The issue of age of consent under POCSO and validity of personal law marriage was deferred for further adjudication.
-
The Court acknowledged the need to reconcile personal law with child protection laws in such complex cases.
Analysis
-
The Court’s approach was empathetic, contextual, and rights-based, focusing on liberty and autonomy rather than rigid technicalities.
-
It recognised the real-life implications of statutory provisions in cases of consensual adolescent relationships that evolve into marriages.
-
The judgment sheds light on the tension between POCSO’s strict liability framework and personal law marriages.
-
Justice Monga’s observations suggest a need for nuanced interpretation where the minor is now an adult, affirming that state intervention must not infringe personal liberty unnecessarily.
-
The Court also demonstrated institutional humility by acknowledging Islamic law experts and thanking the Amicus Curiae, Ms. Nandita Rao, for her contributions.