POCSO convict spared from jail sentence

Transcript

Hello everyone!

Welcome to SCO’s channel. I’m Gauri Kashyap and our topic for this episode is about a rare decision from the Supreme Court.

On 23 May 2025, the Supreme Court spared a person convicted under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. And they spared him from a 20 year jail sentence. The Court exercised its wide powers to do complete justice under Article 142 and declared that the convict’s imprisonment would cause further harm to the victim.

The two Judge Bench consisting Justices AS Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan acknowledged the systemic failures in the implementation of the POCSO Act that exacerbated the victim’s trauma. A teen victim left her home to live with the adult accused, who fathered a child with her. After failed attempts to bring her home, her parents abandoned her.

The accused was charged with kidnapping, particularly with the intention to compel her to marry, rape of a minor girl below 16 years of age, and repeated rape of the same woman under the Indian Penal Code. He was also charged with aggravated penetrative sexual assault under POCSO.

There were gross delays in the investigation. The crime was committed in May 2018, but the accused was arrested in December 2021, and the charge sheet was filed in January 2022. The state further failed to perform its obligation to take care of the victim under the POCSO Act and the Juvenile Justice, (Care and Protection of Children) Act.

When the case went to a district court in West Bengal, the Judge convicted him of all charges. When the case reached a two Judge Bench at the Calcutta High Court, the girl said that her relations with the man were consensual and that she had eloped to marry him out of her own volition. But the point here is consent is not an exception under the POCSO Act.

The High Court, however, acquitted him and commented that there was a duty or an obligation for every female adolescent to protect her dignity, integrity, and control her sexual urges. Shocked by the comments made by the High Court, the Supreme Court took suo moto cognizance of the case. It came down heavily on the High Court for its observations and restored the conviction of the accused for sexual assault under the POCSO Act and rape of a minor under the Indian Penal Code.

The Court also set up a committee of three experts, including a clinical psychologist and a social scientist, to assess the state of the victim and her life. It postponed sentencing of the convict to a point after the Court reviewed the committee’s report. The committee documented the victim’s difficulties navigating the legal system to secure the accused’s release. It noted that the legal proceedings caused emotional and financial hardship for the family. The report highlighted significant systemic failures in implementing child protection measures under the POCSO Act.

The report made a crucial conclusion. It was not the legal crime but the subsequent legal battle that traumatised the victim. It recommended that the family unit consisting of the convict, victim, and their child remain intact for the best interest of the victim and her child. It also recommended that the state provide financial, legal and educational support to the family.

While deciding the punishment that has to be awarded to the convict, the Supreme Court decided that he will not undergo a jail sentence. It recognized the collective failure of the society and the state machinery in protecting the victim. It prioritized the victim’s rehabilitation and the stability of her family unit.

Justice Oka wrote, “Though the victim did not treat the incident as a heinous crime, she suffered because of it. This was because at an earlier stage the victim could not make an informed choice due to the shortcomings of our society, our legal system and her family. In fact, she did not get any opportunity to make an informed choice. The society judged her, the legal system failed her, and her own family abandoned her. Now she is at a stage where she is desperate to save her husband. Now she is emotionally committed to the accused and has become very possessive of her small family.”

The Bench gave importance to the choices made by the victim, who is now an adult, and allowed her to continue living with the accused. They concluded that sentencing him to jail would cause further harm to her and their child. The Court directed the state of West Bengal to act as her guardian and explicitly stated that the decision should not be considered a precedent.

These are some of the directions given by the court. It asked the State Government of West Bengal to act as a true guardian of the victim and her child; to provide better shelter for the victim and her family within the next couple of months; to bear the entire expenditure of the victim’s education up to 10th standard and her undergraduate degree if she chooses to pursue the course; to bear the entire expenditure of the child’s education up to 10th standard; to ensure that she is educated in a good school in the vicinity of the victim’s residence; to take the assistance of NGOs or public spirited citizens for the purpose of securing the debts incurred by the victim as a one time measure; and to file compliance reports detailing the implementation of these directions.

The first report is due by the 15th of July this year and subsequent reports every six months.

In this case, the Court rose to meet the challenges of the situation and spared the convict from sentencing despite the punishment prescribed under POCSO. But it made sure to emphasise that this was not a precedent, meaning that it could not be used to seek similar relief in other cases. This was a tragic one off, and the Court wanted to keep it that way.

Thank you for tuning in. For more such stories from the Supreme Court, subscribe to our channel on YouTube, Spotify and on all prominent social media platforms. Don’t forget to visit scobserver.in. I’ll see you soon!