Delhi High Court: Marriage Cannot Be Used as a Defence in a POCSO Case
The Delhi High Court refused to quash a criminal case filed under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) against a man accused of sexual intercourse with his wife, who was a minor at the time.
The girl was 16 years and 3 months old and the man was 28 years old when the marriage took place.
The accused had argued that the marriage was valid under Muslim personal law and should shield him from prosecution.
Justice Sanjeev Narula, delivering the ruling on 23 September 2026, held that "marriage does not advance a child's age" and that personal law cannot override a specific criminal law like the POCSO Act.
The court reasoned that if a marriage certificate could block a POCSO case, the law's protection would depend on whether a marriage had been arranged, not on the child's actual age, weakening the statute's purpose.
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012
The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 is a special law made only to protect children (anyone below 18 years) from sexual abuse and exploitation. Before this law, cases of child sexual abuse were tried under the general provisions of the old Indian Penal Code, which did not clearly define many forms of abuse and were often not sensitive to a child's needs in court.
The case against the accused was registered under the POCSO Act because the girl was under 18 at the time of the alleged offence. The accused tried to use his personal-law marriage as a shield, but the Delhi High Court held that the POCSO Act's special, overriding protection for every child below 18 cannot be defeated this way.
The Marital Rape Exception: Exception 2 to Section 63 of the BNS
Section 63 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 (India's new main criminal code, which replaced the Indian Penal Code, 1860, from 1 July 2024) defines the offence of rape. Along with the main definition, the section carries two listed exceptions, situations that Parliament has said do not count as rape even though they might otherwise fit the definition.
Because the girl was 16, well below 18, Exception 2 to Section 63 of the BNS could not have applied even on the accused's own case; the marriage did not exempt him from either the POCSO Act or the BNS's rape provisions, which is exactly what the Delhi High Court reaffirmed.
Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937
The Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 is a short Indian law that says Muslim personal law, called "Shariat," and not any local custom, will be the rule courts use to decide certain family matters for Muslims in India.
The accused's marriage may have been treated as religiously valid under the 1937 Act, but the Delhi High Court held that this personal-law validity could not override the POCSO Act's protection for the 16-year-old girl, refusing to quash the criminal case on that ground.
- Ruling delivered by Justice Sanjeev Narula, Delhi High Court, 23 September 2026.
- Girl's age at marriage: 16 years and 3 months; man's age: 28 years.
- Laws invoked in the case: Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
- POCSO Act sets 18 years as the age of consent for all children, regardless of gender or marital status.
- Exception 2 to Section 63, BNS: marital intercourse exception applies only if the wife is 18 or above, following Independent Thought v. Union of India (2017).
- Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, Section 2, lists the family-law subjects governed by Muslim personal law; it does not fix a marriage age.