The Delhi High Court recently emphasized that the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) maintains a gender-neutral stance. The court strongly disapproved of the notion that the legislation is being misused, labelling such assertions as "insensitive" and misleading. In a case involving allegations of sexual assault against a seven-year-old girl back in 2016, the court, presided over by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, highlighted that while any law, regardless of its gender implications, can potentially be misused, this should not deter the enactment or application of such laws. The court asserted that these laws are enacted to combat the larger issue of such offenses and to deliver justice to genuine victims.
The case pertained to a man named Rakesh, who faced charges of sexual assault against a minor and was accused under various sections of the POCSO Act, along with Sections 376 (rape) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Rakesh had petitioned the High Court after his application under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) was rejected by the trial court. His application sought to have the survivor and her mother re-examined, alleging that their initial cross-examination was merely a procedural formality.
Upon thorough consideration of the case, the Court noted that a span of six years had elapsed since the initial testimonies of the victim and her mother were recorded during the trial court proceedings. Additionally, the Court acknowledged the distressing experience the child victim underwent, having to relive the traumatic incident of sexual assault multiple times – during the assault itself, while providing statements to the police and under Section 164 CrPC before a Magistrate, and subsequently before the trial court during evidence recording.
Justice Sharma firmly expressed that subjecting the victim, who was only seven years old at the time of the incident, to recount the same incident yet again after six years, solely due to differences in cross-examination methods between previous and current legal counsel, would be unjust. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petitioner's plea, with Advocate Hitesh Thakur representing Rakesh and the State being represented by Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Manoj Pant.
Click Here to: Download/View Related File
TAGS: Delhi High Court POCSO Act gender-neutral legislation misuse insensitive Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma child sexual assault minor victim Rakesh v State of NCT of Delhi & Anr Section 311 CrPC cross-examination genuine victims Indian Penal Code sexual offenses plea rejection Advocate Hitesh Thakur Additional Public Prosecutor Manoj Pant.
