logo
‘Legal system failed her': SC spares sentence in POCSO case linked to Calcutta HC's ‘control sexual urges' remark

‘Legal system failed her': SC spares sentence in POCSO case linked to Calcutta HC's ‘control sexual urges' remark

Hindustan Times23-05-2025

The Supreme Court on Friday decided not to sentence a man convicted under the POCSO Act, 2012, saying the legal process had caused more harm to the victim than the incident itself.
A bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan invoked Article 142 of the Constitution, which allows the Supreme Court to do 'complete justice,' to show leniency in the case. The decision was based on a detailed report from a court-appointed expert committee.
The judgment came after a suo motu proceeding triggered by controversial remarks made by the Calcutta high court while acquitting a 25-year-old man earlier convicted under the POCSO Act.
The high court's comments on adolescent sexuality, saying that girls should 'control their sexual urges,' drew widespread criticism, reported LiveLaw.
The Supreme Court overturned the acquittal on August 20, 2024, reinstated the conviction, and condemned the high court's language as 'objectionable and unwarranted,' violating Article 21 of the Constitution.
The convict, previously found guilty under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), is now married to the victim, who is an adult, and they live together with their child.
'The final report concludes that though the incident is seen as crime in law the victim did not accept it as one. The committee records that it was not the legal crime that caused any trauma to the victim but rather it was the consequence that followed which took a toll on her. What she had to face as a consequence was the police, the legal system, and constant battle to save the accused from punishment,' LiveLaw quoted the Supreme Court bench as saying.
'The facts of this case are an eye-opener for everyone. It highlights the lacunae in the legal system,' the Supreme Court observed.
It added that the victim had been denied the opportunity to make an informed choice due to failures in societal, familial, and legal structures.
'The society judged her, the legal system failed her, and her own family abandoned her,' the bench remarked.
The Supreme Court further recognised the emotional bond the victim has developed with the accused. 'That is the reason we are giving for exercising power under Article 142, not to impose sentence,' Justice Oka said, stressing the unique and deeply personal dynamics of the case.
Following the Calcutta high court's suo motu proceedings, the apex court formed a three-member committee, including a clinical psychologist, a social scientist, and a child welfare officer, to provide guidance to the victim and assist her in understanding her rights and options.
Based on the committee's confidential report, the Supreme Court determined that sentencing the man would cause further harm to the victim.
In earlier hearings, the apex court directed the West Bengal government to ensure access to education for the couple's child and recommended vocational support for the victim after her 10th board exams.
Moreover, the top court issued broad directives for nationwide compliance with child protection laws, mandating that the judgment be circulated to all States and Union Territories for review and policy action.
The Ministry of Women and Child Development was asked to consider the suggestions made by the SC-appointed amicus curiae and report on further steps.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Cash controversy: SC should allow filing of FIR against justice Varma, says Dhankhar
Cash controversy: SC should allow filing of FIR against justice Varma, says Dhankhar

Hindustan Times

timean hour ago

  • Hindustan Times

Cash controversy: SC should allow filing of FIR against justice Varma, says Dhankhar

Vice president Jagdeep Dhankhar on Friday asserted that in the backdrop of the indictment of justice Yashwant Varma by a panel appointed by the Supreme Court in the 'cash' seizure case, the judiciary should have given permission for launching criminal proceedings against him. Dhankhar, during a meeting with the executive committee members of Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association led by president, Sartej Narula at Punjab Raj Bhawan in Chandigarh on Friday morning, also said that the present government at the Centre is 'handicapped' in the given scenario and can't register an FIR due to a Supreme Court judgment, passed three decades ago. 'It (judgment) provides virtually impregnable cover. Unless permission is accorded by a functionary at the highest level in the judiciary, an FIR can't be registered,' Dhankhar remarked. 'The permission (to register FIR) should have been given on the very first day. …A compulsive, expedient situation should have been there because the mechanism evolved is the same. Second, it could have been given at least after the report,' added Dhankhar, who arrived in Chandigarh on Thursday. After spending a day at the Punjab Raj Bhawan, he headed to Himachal Pradesh. Dhankhar emphasised that judges need protection because they make 'tough decisions and cannot be subjected to investigation in a routine way. 'But the facts of this case warranted a proper probe,' he stated. While referring to the panel of three judges set up by the Supreme Court, Dhankhar, questioned the sanctity of the committee and said, whether the report submitted is 'actionable' and whether this committee can substitute for an FIR investigation. Dhankhar equated those indulging in corruption with 'sharks' and said that they must not be spared. He underlined that no other constitutional office has immunity from facing criminal action while in office. The President and the governors have immunity from prosecution only till they are in office, he further remarked. Dhankhar appreciated the role of Bar associations in the country in picking up this issue and said that lawyers are 'watchdogs' of democracy. On May 5, a three-member in-house enquiry committee submitted its report to the then CJI confirming that cash was indeed found at the residence of justice Varma in March, then a sitting Delhi high court judge. Acting on the same, then CJI Sanjiv Khanna initiated the process for the removal of justice Varma by writing to the government. Reports suggest that the government might move an impeachment motion against justice Varma in the Monsoon session.

Supreme Court slaps notice on KTR over alleged Musi scam
Supreme Court slaps notice on KTR over alleged Musi scam

Hans India

timean hour ago

  • Hans India

Supreme Court slaps notice on KTR over alleged Musi scam

Hyderabad: The Supreme Court on Friday issued notices to KT Rama Rao in the case related to the BRS leader's allegations of corruption by the Congress government to the tune of Rs 25,000 crore in Musi. A hearing was held in the Supreme Court on Friday on the petition filed by Congress leader Atram Suguna. A bench comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma heard the petition. Rama Rao had previously alleged that the Congress government had committed a scam of Rs 25,000 crore in the name of Musi rejuvenation. Expressing strong objection to the allegations made by KTR, Congress leader Atram Suguna filed a complaint at the Utnur police station. The police registered a case against KTR based on the complaint of the Congress leader. KTR had earlier approached the Telangana High Court to quash the case registered against him. After hearing the arguments, the High Court gave a verdict quashing the FIR registered against KTR. However, Suguna filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging the High Court verdict. The hearing on this was held on Friday and the Supreme Court issued notices to KTR asking him to reply to the petition.

Anticipatory bail not to be given mechanically: SC
Anticipatory bail not to be given mechanically: SC

New Indian Express

time2 hours ago

  • New Indian Express

Anticipatory bail not to be given mechanically: SC

NEW DELHI: Anticipatory bail in cases involving serious offences should not be given in a mechanical manner, the Supreme Court has said. A three-judge bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol, and Sandeep Mehta made the observation while setting aside an order of anticipatory bail to four accused persons in a murder case. Observing that the Patna HC had 'clearly failed' to appreciate the gravity and nature of the allegations in the case, the court directed that the accused should surrender within eight weeks. The SC passed the order on hearing an appeal filed by the victim's son challenging the order granting these four persons the anticipatory bail. 'The order of the High Court (Patna) does not disclose any reasoning for granting anticipatory bail in a matter involving serious offences under Sections 302 (Murder) and 307 (Attempt to Murder) of the IPC,' said the bench.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store