Latest news with #IPC
The Hindu
35 minutes ago
- The Hindu
How has SC deviated from the POCSO Act in a recent judgment?
The story so far: On May 23, the Supreme Court (SC) declined to impose a sentence on a man convicted under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), noting that the victim did not view the incident as a crime and had suffered more from the legal fallout. Why was POCSO enacted? Enacted in December 2012, the POCSO Act criminalises both penetrative and non-penetrative sexual assault, sexual harassment, and child pornography. A gender-neutral law, POCSO deems all minors under 18 incapable of 'consent', and mandates child-friendly procedures like special courts, in-camera trials, and video-recorded testimonies. With strict penalties, a presumption of guilt on the accused, and time-bound trials, the Act aims to fill critical legislative voids and deliver swift, victim-centric justice. What is the case? The case involved a 13-year-old girl from rural West Bengal, reported missing by her mother in May 2018, who was later found to have married a 25-year-old man (accused). Despite her mother's rescue efforts, she stayed with him and later gave birth to a daughter. Based on an FIR by her mother, a special judge in September 2022 convicted the accused under POCSO and IPC Sections 363 (kidnapping), 366 (kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel her marriage etc), 376 (2)(n) (repeated rape on same woman) and 376 (3) (rape on woman under 16 years), sentencing him to 20 years imprisonment. However, the Calcutta HC overturned the conviction by invoking its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, despite POCSO's non-recognition of 'consensual relationships' with minors. It further recommended legislative amendments to exclude such relationships from POCSO's ambit. The judgment veered into a discourse on 'adolescent sexuality', attributing it to climate change, food habits, early puberty, and a 'taboo-free atmosphere' influenced by social media and pornography. This unscientific reasoning overlooked social factors and reinforced outdated gender norms. What did the SC state? On August 20, 2024, the top court in a suo motu proceeding set aside the HC's ruling, reaffirming that POCSO does not recognise 'consensual sex' with minors and its objective must not be diluted. Stressing that judgments must remain concise and law-focused, it criticised the HC for straying from 'legal reasoning' into personal opinions and social commentary. However, sentencing was deferred pending a report from a three-member expert panel tasked with meeting the victim and submitting findings. The expert committee found that the victim, now living in poverty and a temporary shelter, remains committed to the accused and faces significant hardship in tackling the police, society and legal system to secure his release. It flagged the inadequate implementation of the POCSO Act as a 'collective failure' and recommended keeping the family unit intact for the child's welfare, alongside providing financial, legal, and educational support. 'The society judged her, the legal system failed her, and her own family abandoned her', the SC observed, citing the report. Exercising Article 142 (extraordinary jurisdiction), it withheld sentencing and directed the West Bengal government to ensure her welfare and rehabilitation. What next? The unusual deviation from the child protection law in this case must not set a precedent, as the judgment emphasises. Any such exception risks weakening the core intent of the POCSO Act to protect minors from sexual exploitation. Opening the door to exceptions could lead to widespread misuse, with perpetrators hiding behind the guise of 'family protection' to exploit vulnerable girls. India urgently needs comprehensive sex education and a stigma-free curriculum. Kartikey Singh is a lawyer based in Delhi.
Hans India
an hour ago
- Hans India
Punjilal gets lifer in parcel bomb case
Bhubaneswar: Punjilal Meher was sentenced to life imprisonment by a court in Bolangir district on Wednesday for killing two persons, including a groom, by sending a parcel bomb as a wedding gift. Punjilal, a lecturer at Jyoti Vikas College in Bhainsa, had a professional enmity with the groom's mother at the college where she worked as the principal. Due to this reason, Punjilal hatched the conspiracy to kill her son Soumya and sent the bomb as a wedding gift in 2018, police said. Sonali Pattanaik, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Patnagarh, has convicted the accused Punjilal Meher (56) and sentenced him to life imprisonment, government counsel Chittaranjan Kanungo said. The court convicted him under Sections 302 (murder), 307 (attempt to murder) and 201 (destroy evidence of a crime) of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substances Act, he said. The court sentenced life imprisonment under two sections, 10 years of imprisonment under two charges and seven years imprisonment under another charge. Kanungo said that all the sentences would run concurrently. To prove the case, the prosecution examined 62 witnesses, 100 documentary evidences and 51 material objects, in the court. 'Our submission was to treat it as a rarest of rare cases. However, the court did not observe it as a rarest of rare cases because all heinous crime cases cannot be treated like that,' the public prosecutor said. He said the quantum of punishment pronounced by the court is very encouraging. It will give a positive message to the society at large. The court also imposed a fine of Rs 1.40 lakh on the convict. He will remain behind bars for the rest of his life, Kanungo informed mediapersons outside the court. Arun Bothra, a senior police officer, who led the Crime Branch investigation into the case in 2018, said, 'When we took over the case, there was no evidence, no eyewitness, nothing to lead the investigation. There was no suspicion on Punjilal Meher.' The Crime Branch got clues from an anonymous letter sent to the Bolangir SP (by Punjilal), Bothra said. 'We collected crucial evidence like the cover of the letter, soft copy of the letter, the printer used to print it, and adhesive used to seal the letter from Punjilal Meher's possession. All were scientifically matched and proved,' Bothra told mediapersons. Later, the accused narrated the entire episode and also demonstrated the bomb-making procedure before the police, he said, adding that Punjilal admitted to having learnt the process of parcel bomb-making from videos on the internet. 'I feel satisfied after the accused was convicted by the court and justice has been served to the victim's family,' Bothra, who is now serving as the ADG of Police, Railways and Coastal Security, said. 'We have suffered an irreparable loss. We were praying for the death sentence. Still, we are satisfied with the judgment of the court,' the deceased groom's father, Rabindra Sahoo, said. Sanjukta Sahoo, the victim's mother, too, expressed satisfaction with the court ruling while comparing Punjilal with a demon. Soumya Sekhar Sahoo, in his mid-twenties, and his 85-year-old grandmother, Jemamani Sahoo, were killed in the blast. His wife, Rimarani, suffered critical injuries when a parcel bomb, disguised as a wedding gift, exploded at their Patnagarh home in Bolangir district on February 23, 2018. The blast had taken place when the groom opened the gift. Following a request by the new bride and her family, the then chief minister Naveen Patnaik had ordered the Crime Branch to probe into the incident. The Crime Branch took over the investigation on March 23, 2018, and arrested Punjilal in April 2018. He is currently lodged in the Patnagarh sub-jail. The Crime Branch had said that revenge was the motive behind the crime.
Hindustan Times
3 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
‘Single hand can't clap': Apex court gives bail to influencer in rape case
The Supreme Court on Wednesday granted interim bail to a 23-year-old social media influencer accused of raping a 40-year-old woman after he had spent nine months in jail without charges being framed in the case. A bench of justices BV Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma questioned the Delhi Police's decision to invoke rape charges in the case, noting that the woman was an adult who had voluntarily accompanied the accused on outstation trips on multiple occasions. 'A single hand can't clap. On what basis have you filed a case under Section 376 of IPC? She is not a baby. The woman is 40 years old. They have gone together to Jammu,' the bench observed. 'Why have you invoked 376? This lady goes to Jammu seven times and the husband is not bothered,' it added. The bench court also remarked on the man, asking, 'Who gets influenced by such people?' The judges made these observations orally in open court; in its order, the bench said the matter was fit for interim bail, given the accused's prolonged incarceration and delay in framing charges. 'Pending consideration of this special leave petition, we find that this is a fit case where interim bail ought to be granted to the petitioner herein who is aged about 23 years as of now since he has been in jail for over nine months (since 07.08.2024) and charges have not yet been framed till date. In the circumstance, we direct that the petitioner be produced before the concerned trial court as early as possible and the trial court shall release him on interim bail subject to such conditions as it may deem appropriate,' the Supreme Court said. The court also restrained the accused from contacting the complainant or misusing his liberty while out on bail. The observations came during a hearing on a plea filed by the accused, Harash Kumar,challenging a Delhi high court order that denied him bail, citing the seriousness of the allegations. According to the woman's complaint, she first met the accused in 2021 via social media while seeking promotional help for her clothing brand. What began as a professional relationship allegedly turned abusive, with the woman accusing Kumar of drugging, sexually assaulting, extorting, and threatening her over a period of the next two-and-a-half years. During initial interactions, the accused allegedly requested to be bought iPhone, which she arranged through a store in Jammu. However, their professional relationship soured after the accused attempted to resell the device. The authorised seller returned the money in the woman's account, but after deducting ₹20,000. Although he promised to return the money, the woman said she decided to end all ties with him. In December 2021, the man visited the woman at her Noida house to return the ₹20,000 and apologise. He subsequently persuaded her to travel for a brand shoot in Connaught Place. During the journey, the accused allegedly gave her sweets laced with intoxicants and she lost to assurances that she would be taken to Hindu Rao Hospital, the man allegedly took her to a secluded area behind the hospital, sexually assaulted her, stole money from her purse, and took nude photographs of her. Thereafter, the woman said, she was coerced into travelling to Jammu where she was subjected to continued sexual abuse, extortion, and threats over a two-and-a-half-year period, according to the complaint. Following her complaint, an FIR was registered against Kumar in July 2024, under sections 376, 354, 506, and 509 of the IPC for the offences of rape, sexual assault, criminal intimidation, and insulting the modesty of a woman. Kumar was arrested by the Delhi police from Jammu in August 2024. In its April 30, 2025, order denying bail to the accused, the Delhi high court had acknowledged the existence of extensive WhatsApp exchanges between the complainant and Kumar, indicating a prior relationship. The high court had noted at the time that the complainant did not dispute that she and Kumar knew each other before the alleged incidents of rape and sexual assault. Kumar's counsel had submitted over 100 pages of WhatsApp chats, which included exchanges of birthday greetings, discussions about meetings, and expressions of affection. There was even a message where the complainant demanded a mangalsutra for daily wear. Incidentally, these messages spanned both before and after the alleged rape incident, the high court had noted at the time. Despite these observations, the high court had ultimately held that the WhatsApp messages did indicate 'sustained and deliberate acts of blackmail, criminal intimidation, and extortion.'
India Today
5 hours ago
- Politics
- India Today
36 convicted in Agra's Panwari violence case after 34 years; sentence on May 30
A special SC/ST court in Agra, in a landmark judgment, has convicted 36 people and acquitted 15 others in a case related to the infamous Panwari caste violence incident that took place 34 years ago, on June 21, 1990. The sentencing of the 36 convicted individuals will be announced in open court on May court delivered its verdict after hearing 31 eyewitness testimonies and examining extensive evidence. Three accused remain absconding, with non-bailable warrants (NBWs) issued against of the 80 people initially chargesheeted, 27 have died and 53 were alive at the time of the verdict. 32 convicts have been sent to jail, while the case of one juvenile is being heard separately in the juvenile court. The verdict was delivered under multiple IPC sections including 148, 149, 323, 144, 325, 452, 436, 427, 504, 395, along with Sections 3/2/5 of the SC/ST was Panwari incident?On June 21, 1990, a wedding procession from the Jatav community reached Panwari village in Agra's Sikandra police jurisdiction. Allegedly, members of the Jat community objected to the procession passing in front of their situation escalated into a violent caste clash, resulting in arson and large-scale destruction of property, particularly targeting homes of the Jatav unrest spread quickly across Agra, prompting the imposition of curfew in the city. The incident had significant political Opposition Leader and former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi visited the affected families. Local MP Ajay Singh, who was also a junior Railway Minister at the time, played a key role in calming tensions on both June 22, 1990, an FIR was registered at the Sikandra police station by the then Station House Officer Omvir Singh Rana, based on a bystander's FIR named 6,000 unidentified persons under multiple IPC sections and the SC/ST Act, but no arrests were made at that time. Among the accused was BJP MLA Chaudhary Babulal, who was acquitted in 2022 by the court. IN THIS STORY#Uttar Pradesh
Time of India
6 hours ago
- Time of India
Single hand can't clap, says SC, gives interim bail to rape accused
Supreme Court NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday gave interim bail to a 23-year-old accused of raping a 40-year-old, noting that charges had not been framed even though he had been in jail for nine months. In scathing comments, a bench comprising Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma also asked how Delhi Police could file a rape case against the man, a social media influencer, when the woman had gone voluntarily with him. "A single hand can't clap. On what basis have you filed case under Section 376 of IPC. She is not a baby. The woman is 40 years old. They have gone together to Jammu. Why have you invoked 376. This lady goes to Jammu seven times and the husband is not bothered," the bench observed. It directed that the accused be produced before the trial court and granted interim bail subject to terms and conditions. According to the police complaint, the woman first came into contact with him in 2021 through social media while seeking a social media influencer to promote her clothing brand. During initial interactions, the accused allegedly requested an iPhone to enhance content creation, which she arranged through an authorised Apple Store in Jammu. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Data center innovation: Titanium improves workload performance - Google Cloud: Future of Infrastructure CIO | Google Cloud, AMD Undo However, their professional relationship soured after the accused attempted to resell the device. In December 2021, the man visited the woman at her house in Noida to return the Rs 20,000. He subsequently persuaded her to travel for a brand shoot in Connaught Place. During the journey, the accused allegedly gave her sweets laced with intoxicants and she lost consciousness. Contrary to assurances that she would be taken to Hindu Rao Hospital, the man allegedly took her to a secluded area, sexually assaulted her, stole money from her purse, and captured her nude photographs. Thereafter, the woman was allegedly coerced into travelling to Jammu where she was subjected to continued sexual abuse, extortion, and threats over a two-and-a-half-year period, according to the complaint.
