Anversinh @ Kiransinh Fatesinh Zala v. The State of Gujarat
Background
In 1998, a 16-year-old girl went missing from her workplace and was later found with the appellant, a young man with whom she was in a consensual relationship; he was convicted by the trial court of rape and kidnapping. The Gujarat High Court acquitted him of rape (accepting that the relationship was consensual) but upheld his conviction for kidnapping a minor from lawful guardianship and sentenced him to five years' rigorous imprisonment. He challenged the kidnapping conviction before the Supreme Court, arguing the relationship was consensual and she had left home voluntarily.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court held that under Section 361 IPC, the consent of a minor (under 18 for a girl) is legally irrelevant to a kidnapping charge, since the provision exists to protect the guardian's custodial rights, not merely the minor's autonomy; evidence showed the appellant had enticed the girl to a specific location, which was enough to establish kidnapping regardless of mutual affection. However, on sentencing, the Court took into account that no force or weapon was used, the appellant himself was barely an adult (18-19) at the time, over 22 years had passed with both parties now settled in life, there was no criminal history, and there was no exploitative power imbalance between the two, distinguishing it from more exploitative kidnapping cases. The conviction was upheld but the five-year sentence was reduced to time already served, and the appellant was set free.
Lesson Learnt
A minor's consent or romantic involvement is not a legal defence to kidnapping from lawful guardianship, because the law protects the guardian's custodial authority, but courts retain discretion to calibrate the punishment humanely where the facts show no violence, exploitation, or ongoing danger, especially after decades have passed.