Prelims: Public policy| Social development | Current events of national and international importance.
Why in news?
Recently, Supreme Court declined to impose a sentence on a man convicted under the POCSO Act, noting that the victim did not view the incident as a crime and had suffered more from the legal fallout.
|
POCSO - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act
|
- It was enacted in 2012 to protect children under 18 years from sexual offences.
- It criminalises,
- Penetrative and non-penetrative sexual assault
- Sexual harassment
- Child pornography
- Gender-Neutral Law – The Act applies equally to all children under the age of 18, regardless of gender.
- It also recognizes that offenders can be of any gender.
- Consent of Minors is Not Legally Valid – Any sexual activity involving a person below 18 is considered non-consensual by law.
- Even if the minor claims it was consensual, the law deems it sexual offence under the law.
- Special Courts – It establishes Special Courts in every district for speedy trials.
- Child-Friendly Procedures – It ensures in-camera trials, where the public is not allowed during proceedings.
- It allows video-recorded testimonies and statements to prevent re-traumatizing the child.
- Presumption of Guilt – Under Section 29, if a person is accused of a sexual offence under POCSO, the court presumes the accused is guilty unless proven otherwise.
- Time-Bound Trials – The law mandates that recording of the child’s evidence should be completed within 30 days of the Special Court taking cognizance.
- The entire trial should be completed within one year from the date of taking cognizance.
|
- Case background – In 2018, a 13-year-old girl went missing and was later found married to a 25-year-old man.
- Despite her mother’s rescue attempts, she stayed with him and later gave birth to a child.
- The accused was convicted in 2022 under POCSO, and various IPC Sections.
- Special POCSO Court sentenced the accused to 20 years imprisonment.
- The Calcutta High Court overturned the conviction and recommended exclusion of consensual adolescent relationships from POCSO.
- Supreme Court set aside the Calcutta HC’s ruling and withheld sentencing and sought a deeper understanding of the victim’s present situation.
- It deferred sentencing under Article 142 of the Constitution, citing:
- The victim's welfare
- Her continued support for the accused
- Her social isolation and poverty
- A three-member expert committee was formed to assesses the situation before a final decision.
- Expert panel findings – It flagged the inadequate implementation of the POCSO Act as a “collective failure”.
- It recommended keeping the family unit intact for the child’s welfare, alongside providing financial, legal, and educational support.
- SC withheld sentencing and directed the West Bengal government to ensure her welfare and rehabilitation.
Controversy in SC ruling
- SC’s withholding of punishment using its extraordinary jurisdiction (Article 142) is unusual.
- It could lead to misuse by perpetrators claiming "consensual" relationships with minors.
- It undermines the core intent of absolute protection for children from exploitation.
Way Forward
- Need for comprehensive sex education and a stigma-free curriculum in schools.
- Reforms in POCSO implementation to make justice more sensitive and effective.
- Exceptions must remain rare and guided strictly by law and welfare but not social pressure or sentiment.
Reference
The Hindu| SC deviated from the POCSO Act in a recent judgment
