The case revolved around serious allegations made by a minor female wrestler, whose complaint formed the basis of a second First Information Report (FIR) filed on April 28, 2023, at the Connaught Place police station. The FIR invoked multiple provisions, including Sections 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty), 354A (sexual harassment), 354D (stalking), and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code, along with Section 10 of the POCSO Act.

Court accepts closure report

On May 26, 2025, Additional Sessions Judge Gomti Manocha of the Patiala House Courts accepted the closure report filed by the Delhi Police on June 15, 2023. The report spanned 550 pages and concluded that there was no corroborative evidence to support the allegations of sexual harassment. The judge, after summoning the minor complainant to appear before the court, noted that she did not oppose the closure of the case and had expressed satisfaction with the police investigation. As per The Hindu, the judge formally recorded this by stating, “Cancellation accepted.”

The closure followed an in-camera hearing held earlier on August 1, 2023, during which the minor also stated that she had no objections to the closure report. The proceedings had been carried out with sensitivity, given the identity of the complainant and the nature of the allegations under the POCSO Act.

Background: Retraction amid alleged intimidation

However, the developments leading to the case’s closure were fraught with controversy, particularly around the complainant’s retraction of the allegations. The father of the minor wrestler—who was also the complainant in the FIR—publicly stated that he had changed his statement due to immense pressure and fear for the safety of his family.

In a statement reported by The Hindu, the father disclosed: “I changed my statement in court because I was scared… scared for my family, daughter, and myself… my family is living under constant threat.”

He further claimed that he was being threatened by unidentified individuals and that his entire family was living in intense fear. Despite these threats, he asserted that they had not withdrawn all parts of the complaint—specifically maintaining the portion that accused Singh of discriminating against his daughter.

This clarification came amid widespread confusion triggered by media reports falsely claiming that the minor had withdrawn her complaint entirely. Shortly thereafter, the father issued a “confession” in which he stated that he had fabricated the allegations of sexual harassment in anger and frustration over his daughter’s rejection from the U-17 Asian Championship.

Speaking to PTI, the father admitted: “I was filled with rage that my child’s one-year hard work had gone down the drain because of that referee’s decision in the final and I decided to take revenge.”

He attributed his grievance to the WFI leadership, stating that the referee involved in the contested match had been appointed by Brij Bhushan Singh.

“The federation appointed the referee. Who heads the federation? Who else should I be angry at?”

In the original FIR, however, the father had detailed multiple alleged incidents of inappropriate behaviour by Singh, including claims that the WFI chief touched the minor inappropriately, asked her to support him in return for his support, and pulled her forcefully toward him. He had further claimed that the minor was deeply disturbed by the alleged harassment, which continued to “haunt her.”

Despite the retraction of those specific allegations, the complainant’s father reiterated to The Hindu that they had not withdrawn the part of the complaint that alleged his daughter faced discrimination under Singh’s leadership. (Details may be read here.)

Political and social fallout

Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh has consistently denied all allegations, calling them a politically motivated conspiracy designed to malign his image. He claimed that the complaints were part of a broader campaign to discredit him.

Even as the POCSO case now stands closed, Singh still faces legal proceedings in a separate sexual harassment case filed by six adult women wrestlers. The controversy triggered a nationwide movement in 2023, with top Indian wrestlers—such as Sakshi Malik, Vinesh Phogat, Bajrang Punia, and Sangeeta Phogat—leading prolonged protests at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi. The athletes alleged that Singh had harassed female wrestlers between 2016 and 2019 at various locations, including the WFI office, his official residence, and even during foreign tours. (Details may be read here.)

The public outcry eventually prompted the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports to constitute an oversight committee to examine the allegations. It was only after the Supreme Court intervened in May 2023 that the Delhi Police registered two FIRs—one involving the minor and another based on the complaints of the six other women. (Details may be read here.)

The closure of the POCSO case does not affect the ongoing prosecution in the other case. In June 2023, the Delhi Police filed a 1,000-page chargesheet at the Rouse Avenue court in connection with the adult women complainants’ case. (Details may be read here.)

Legal implications

The POCSO Act mandates stringent punishment for sexual offences involving minors, with minimum sentences starting at three years of imprisonment, depending on the sections applied. The court’s acceptance of the police’s closure report formally ends the legal proceedings against Singh under the POCSO Act, though serious questions remain about the conditions under which the complaint was withdrawn. While this development marks a significant turning point in one of the most high-profile sexual harassment cases in Indian sports history, but it also leaves unresolved concerns about witness intimidation, institutional accountability, and the safety of complainants who come forward in such cases concerning men with power.

Related:

From “liable to be prosecuted” to “neither opposing nor supporting bail”: The curious case of Delhi Police

Protesting wrestlers will resume stir, say govt not ready to arrest WFI chief by June 15

 their repeated sexual trauma in 2021

Battling the Indian sports industry: the cries for justice by women

From deathly silence to violence: The journey of wrestlers struggling for justice

The post Delhi Court accepts closure report in sexual harassment of minor, Drops POCSO case against Brij Bhushan Singh appeared first on SabrangIndia.

This decision sparked significant public outrage, with legal fraternity and child rights activists criticising the ruling as a gross misinterpretation of sexual offence laws. The Supreme Court, acknowledging the gravity of the issue, intervened suo moto. Hearing the suo-moto case, a bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and A.G. Masih strongly rebuked the High Court’s observations, terming them “shocking” and indicative of a “complete lack of sensitivity” in the judicial reasoning.

Supreme Court’s observations

The Supreme Court took particular exception to the rationale of the High Court, noting that the judgment was not issued in haste but was delivered after being reserved for nearly four months. This indicated that the judge had ample time to consider the legal implications, making the insensitivity of the judgment even more alarming. The bench specifically pointed out paragraphs 21, 24, and 26 of the judgment, stating that they reflected an “inhuman approach” and a complete departure from established legal principles. Consequently, the Supreme Court stayed these observations and issued notices to the Union of India, the State of Uttar Pradesh, and other parties involved in the proceedings before the High Court.

For reference, following are the mentioned paras from the judgment of the High Court:

“21. In the present case, the allegation against accused Pawan and Akash is that they grabbed the breasts of the victim and Akash tried to bring down lower garment of the victim and for that purpose they had broken string of her lower garments and tried to drag her beneath the culvert, but due to intervention of witnesses they left the victim and fled away from the place of incident. This fact is not sufficient to draw an inference that the accused persons had determined to commit rape on victim as apart from these facts no other act is attributed to them to further their alleged desire to commit rape on the victim.”

“24. The allegations levelled against the accused Pawan and Akash and facts of the case hardly constitute an offence of attempt to rape in the case. In order to bring out a charge of attempt to rape the prosecution must establish that it had gone beyond the stage of preparation. The difference between preparation and actual attempt to commit an offence consists chiefly in the greater degree of determination.”

“26. After giving a thoughtful consideration and meticulous examination of the facts of the case, this court is of the considered opinion that mere fact that according to prosecution version two accused Pawan and Akash grabbed the breasts of the victim and one of them namely Akash broke the string of her pyjama and tried to drag her beneath the culvert and in the meanwhile on interference of passersby/witnesses the accused persons fled away from the spot leaving the victim behind, is not sufficient to hold that a case of Section 376, 511 IPC or Section 376 IPC read with Section 18 of POCSO Act has been made out against the accused persons.”

Solicitor General of India, Tushar Mehta, also appeared before the Supreme Court and condemned the High Court’s judgment, calling it “disturbing” and “untenable.” The court took cognisance of the case based on a letter submitted by Senior Advocate Shobha Gupta on behalf of the NGO ‘We the Women of India,’ highlighting the potential ramifications of such a ruling on child safety jurisprudence.

Facts of the case and High Court’s ruling

According to the prosecution, the accused persons, Pawan and Akash, assaulted an 11-year-old girl by grabbing her breasts, breaking the string of her pyjama, and attempting to drag her beneath a culvert. The trial court, considering this a case of attempt to rape or attempt to commit penetrative sexual assault, invoked Section 376 of the IPC along with Section 18 of the POCSO Act and issued a summoning order under these provisions.

However, when the accused challenged the summoning order before the Allahabad High Court, the single-judge bench presided over by Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra ruled that the allegations did not meet the threshold for attempt to rape. The court made a legally questionable distinction between preparation and attempt, arguing that the prosecution had not established that the accused had moved beyond the stage of preparation towards committing the offence. Instead, the High Court directed that the accused be tried under the lesser offence of Section 354-B IPC (assault or use of criminal force with intent to disrobe) along with Sections 9 and 10 of the POCSO Act, which deal with aggravated sexual assault.

The High Court’s ruling has been widely condemned for its regressive and flawed interpretation of sexual violence laws. By holding that a greater degree of determination was required to establish an attempt to rape, the court demonstrated an outdated and restrictive understanding of sexual crimes. The ruling also suggested that unless complete disrobing or a near-penetrative act occurred, the offence of attempt to rape could not be established. Such an interpretation ignores decades of legal evolution, including Supreme Court judgments that have recognised a broader and more victim-centred approach to defining sexual violence.

Furthermore, the judgment was riddled with factual inconsistencies regarding the victim’s age. While at one point, the High Court referred to her as 14 years old, in another instance, it described her as “older than 11 years.” However, since the court invoked Section 9(m) of the POCSO Act—applicable in cases where the victim is below 12 years—it can be inferred that the court assumed the victim to be between 11 and 12 years old. This lack of clarity raises concerns about the judicial application of key statutory provisions.

More concerning was the High Court’s failure to consider the victim’s psychological trauma and the terror she must have experienced during the attack. Legal experts have pointed out that the court’s approach was not just legally unsound but also deeply insensitive to the lived realities of sexual violence survivors.

The judgment of the HC may be read below.

Previous dismissal of writ petition challenging the High Court order

In a separate but related development, the Supreme Court had on March 25 dismissed a writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, which sought to challenge the Allahabad High Court’s ruling. The petition was filed by an unrelated third party who was not part of the original criminal proceedings. A bench comprising Justices Bela M. Trivedi and P.B. Varale ruled that such a challenge should have been filed as a Special Leave Petition (SLP) under Article 136, rather than as a writ petition under Article 32.

During the hearing, an advocate appearing for the petitioner attempted to invoke the government’s “Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao” campaign to highlight the case’s broader significance. However, Justice Trivedi immediately interjected, stating that “lecture baazi” (sermonising) would not be entertained in court. She also questioned the absence of the Advocate on Record (AOR) and the petitioner. Following these observations, the court summarily dismissed the writ petition, reinforcing the view that procedural technicalities should not be bypassed in challenging judicial orders.

Implications of the Supreme Court’s intervention

The Supreme Court’s decision to stay the Allahabad High Court’s order is a necessary and urgent corrective measure for several reasons:

1. Judicial accountability: The Supreme Court’s intervention underscores the need for High Courts to exercise sensitivity when adjudicating sexual offence cases. Judges must be held accountable for legal interpretations that dilute the protections granted to victims.
2. Gender justice: The ruling highlights the persistent challenges in ensuring a gender-sensitive legal system. The High Court’s flawed reasoning reflects a need for continuous judicial training on laws related to sexual violence.
3. Legal precedent: By staying the High Court’s order, the Supreme Court has signalled that outdated and restrictive interpretations of sexual offences will not be allowed to shape legal discourse.
4. Child protection: The judgment serves as a reminder that courts must prioritise the best interests of children in cases of sexual violence, rather than engaging in overly technical distinctions that undermine victim/survivor rights.

This case is a stark reminder that while legal statutes provide a framework for justice, the judiciary’s interpretation of these laws plays a crucial role in determining whether justice is truly served. The Supreme Court’s intervention reassures the public that regressive judicial reasoning will not be allowed to weaken protections for survivors of sexual assault.

Related:

Surviving Communal Wrath: Women who have defied the silence, demanded accountability from the state

The illusion of the glamourous Malayalam cinema falls apart: Justice Hema Committee report provides insight into systematic harassment and exploitation of women actors

“How does dictating attire empower women?” Supreme Court partially stays Mumbai College’s Hijab Ban

Marked for deportation, denied due process: Ajabha Khatun, among the 63 facing detention in Assam, seeks Supreme Court’s intervention

The post Supreme Court intervenes in POCSO case, stays Allahabad HC’s “shocking” judgment that downplayed sexual assault against minor appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The charges stemmed from an incident in August 2021, when Ali, a resident of Uttar Pradesh’s Hardoi district, was selling bangles in the Govind Nagar area of Indore’s Banganga locality. He was allegedly assaulted by members of the Bajrang Dal, a Hindutva group, who accused him of sexually harassing a minor girl. A video of the assault went viral, sparking significant outrage, and the alleged assailants instructed the public to not let Ali enter the area again. This led to protests by the Muslim community in Indore, condemning the attack on Ali. Initially, the police were hesitant to file an FIR unless someone from the mob made a complaint. It was only after intervention by Congress leader Imran Pratapgarhi, who supported Ali, that an FIR was lodged against the attackers.

However, the following day, Ali himself was arrested, with the police filing a counter FIR accusing him of attempting to molest a 13-year-old girl. The charges against him were grave, including several serious offenses under the POCSO Act. Despite spending four months in jail before being granted bail by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in December 2021, Ali’s legal struggle continued for more than three years as he faced ongoing court battles. His acquittal on December 3, 2024 marked the end of this long and tumultuous journey.

Taslim Ali reflects on his legal struggles and future

Speaking after his acquittal, Ali shared his emotions with the reporter of Indian Express, describing the experience as both happy and sad— “bittersweet,” as he put it. Reflecting on the ordeal, the IE reported Ali as expressing gratitude towards those who had stood by him during the difficult time and even towards those who had falsely accused him. He noted that he had been implicated in a false case based on his religion and name, which he believes was part of a larger agenda to target him unfairly. Despite the trauma, he expressed no ill will towards the people of Indore, where he had been selling bangles to support his six children. He emphasised that he did not hold any grudge against the city or its residents, stating, “All residents of Indore are my brothers and sisters,” as per the report of the IE.

Describing his experience during the 107 days he spent in jail after he was arrested under POCSO, Ali spoke candidly about the struggles he faced. “Initially, there was a lot of struggle; I was scared,” he admitted, as provided in the IE report. He also mentioned that he had been placed in solitary confinement, but over time, he became more accustomed to the solitude. “The jailers and police were nice to me. I was not harassed,” he said, adding that he never lost faith in the Constitution or the judiciary. 

Since being granted bail in December 2021, Ali told the media that he has returned to his bangle-selling business, traveling from colony to colony and various locations from Uttar Pradesh to Punjab and Indore to support his family. Despite the anxiety of returning to the streets of Indore after such a traumatic experience, Ali said he was motivated by the need to provide for his children and continue the family tradition of selling bangles.

Ali’s lawyer, Sheikh Aleem, explained to the IE reporter that the case collapsed due to key witnesses, including the minor girl involved in the accusation, turning hostile. Furthermore, the claim that Ali had changed his identity, based on the recovery of an Aadhaar card bearing the name “Golu,” was disproven in court. It was revealed that “Golu” was actually Ali’s village name, and he had rectified this on his Aadhaar card later, but the older version had been in his possession on the day of the incident. This clarification, along with testimonies from two village pradhans, helped dismantle the accusations.

Regarding his assailants, Ali revealed that they had apologised to him for the attack. However, he made it clear that he did not wish to pursue any further legal action against them. Instead, Ali expressed a desire to move on from the entire episode and leave it behind. As per the IE report, Ali noted that, “I have nothing against anyone.” His focus now is on returning to his work, moving forward with his life, and providing for his family. Despite the challenges, Ali remains determined to continue his work as a bangle seller and said that he would keep returning to Indore to support his loved ones.

Legal struggles and bail grant for Taslim Ali

Grant of bail: In December 2021, bangle seller Taslim Ali, who had been accused of sexually harassing a Class 6 student, was granted bail by the Madhya Pradesh High Court. Justice Sujoy Paul, who reviewed the case, noted that the nature of the accusation did not warrant Ali’s continued detention until the case’s resolution. Ali had been arrested on August 23, 2021, on charges of molestation and forgery, two days after he was attacked by a mob in Indore’s Govind Nagar. The mob had accused him of using a forged document to sell bangles and of molesting a 14-year-old girl during the Rakhi festival. A video of the assault, which showed Ali being beaten by several men who alleged he had been harassing women under the pretext of selling bangles, went viral on social media.

The next day, a counter-accusation was made by the minor daughter of one of the attackers, accusing Ali of sexual harassment. Following this, Ali was charged under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including Sections 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty), 354-A (sexual harassment), 467 (forgery of valuable security), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), 471 (using forged documents as genuine), 420 (cheating), and 506 (criminal intimidation), as well as Section 7/8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. He was taken into custody on the same day and remained in jail from August 23, 2021, until the bail was granted.

Submissions made before the Court: In court, Ali’s counsel presented the argument that while selling bangles on the day of the alleged incident, Ali had been abused, threatened, and assaulted by a group of individuals. Ali himself had filed a report at the Banganga Police Station on the same day, at 13:45, describing the assault. The defence further argued that the counter-FIR filed against Ali at 6:00 pm that day, accusing him of sexual assault, was a retaliatory move fabricated by those who had threatened him. Ali’s counsel submitted photographs and a CD as evidence, claiming that these would help distinguish between the facts and falsehoods, highlighting who had truly committed the offense.

The prosecution contended that if Ali were granted bail, there was a risk he might flee from justice, making it difficult for them to pursue the case. However, the court dismissed this argument, noting that when the prosecution had visited Ali’s original residence in Uttar Pradesh, they found that he was living in a ‘Pradhanmantri Awas Yojana’ house under the name Asleem, son of Mohar Singh. Since the prosecution had already reached his permanent residence, the court concluded that the likelihood of Ali fleeing was minimal. Additionally, the court noted that there were no criminal antecedents to suggest Ali had been involved in any criminal activities previously, and there was no substantial evidence linking him to threats against the complainants. Considering these factors, the court deemed it appropriate to release Ali on bail.

Previous denial of bail: In September 2021, an Indore court rejected the bail application of a bangle seller who had been attacked by a group of men. The bail application, submitted by advocate Ehtesham Hashmi, had argued that the complaint was fabricated, with no factual basis, and aimed to suppress the true events. The applicant’s defence contended that the complainant had been part of the mob that had assaulted the bangle seller, and that the seller had filed his own complaint against the mob for the brutal attack. The defence further claimed that the present FIR was an attempt to falsely implicate the applicant.

The bail application argues that: a) the said story as mentioned in the FIR is an afterthought to the applicant filing a complaint against the complainant and other; and b) if the applicant ran leaving his belongings behind, as mentioned in the FIR, how is he seen with his belongings in the video where he is being thrashed; (c) the audio of the video makes no mention of the minor girl and the alleged incident of molestation, instead they were asking his name repeatedly; and (d) the narration of facts made in the FIR does not disclose an offense under Sections 7 and 8 of the POCSO Act.

Related:

Rising Tensions: Muslim Religious Sites face renewed attacks, demand for survey in Delhi’s Jama Masjid and Hanuman Chalisa

Right wing’s assault on mosques intensifies: UP Court to hear petition on Budaun’s Shamsi Shahi Mosque amid growing trend of similar targeting of minority shrines

Supreme Court urges UP government to maintain peace and harmony in Sambhal, prohibits the trial court from taking any further steps till January

Sambhal Violence: State crackdown intensifies, thousands accused, and allegations of police misconduct ignite a political and communal crisis in Uttar Pradesh

Uttarakhand: Despite BJP Govt Assurance to Contrary in HC, Hindu Mahapanchayat Held in Uttarkashi

Uttarakhand High Court orders security, condemns hate speech over Uttarkashi Mosque

The post Indore Court clears Muslim bangle seller of molestation charges after lengthy legal battle, states that prosecution failed to prove charges appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On August 20, the Supreme Court slams the Calcutta High Court over the objectionable observations made by the Division bench of the High Court while passing the impugned judgement against the conviction of accused charged under Section 6 of the POCSO, Act 2006 and Sections 363/366 and clause (n) of sub-section (2) and sub-section (3) of Section 376 of the IPC, 1860.

The High Court of Calcutta vide its impugned judgement dated October 18, 2023, set aside the conviction of the accused under the provisions abovementioned, where the High Court observed that while achieving ostensible objectives to protect all children below 18 years from sexual exploitation, the law’s unintended effect has been the deprivation of liberty of young people in consensual relationships.

The Supreme Court of India, expressed its displeasure with the observations and reasoning adopted by the High Court while passing the impugned judgement.

Brief background of the case

The victim, a girl who was fourteen years old at the time of the incident. The victim’s mother lodged a First Information Report (FIR) on May 29, 2018. The victim’s mother stated in her complaint that the victim, who was her minor daughter, escaped from her home at 5:30 p.m. on May 20, 2018 without informing anyone. On inquiry, it was found that the accused enticed her to leave her house. The accused did so with the help of his two sisters. The victim’s mother repeatedly visited the house of the accused and requested him to facilitate the return of her daughter. However, the victim did not come back. A female child was born to the victim.

The accused was arrested on December 19, 2021. The chargesheet was filed on January 27, 2022 against the accused for the offences for which he was convicted. Initially, the accused was charged with Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006. Later, the Ld. Special judge under the POCSO Act found that there was no evidence of marriage between the victim and the accused and the charge under Section 9 of the 2006 Act was held as not substantiated.

The Ld. Special Judge, Baruipur, South 24 Parganas, convicted the accused for the offences of punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Appeal against conviction before Calcutta High Court

The accused preferred an appeal before the Calcutta High Court against the Conviction. The Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court on October 18, 2023, vide its impugned judgment held that the offences punishable under Section 363 and 366 of the IPC were not made out and the High Court acquitted the accused for the two offences and while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the CrPC, 1973 set aside the conviction of the accused for the offences punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and sub-sections 2(n) and (3) of Section 376 of the IPC. The bench observed that the mother of the victim had disowned her and therefore, the victim was continuously residing with the accused along with their minor child.

State of West Bengal’s appeal against judgement/order of the HC

Aggrieved by the judgement and order dated October 18, 2023, passed by a Division Bench of the High court, the State of West Bengal preferred Criminal Appeal No. 1451 of 2024 before the Supreme Court as a suo moto writ petition, in pursuance of directions issued by the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for challenging the impugned judgement. In the present case, senior counsel Madhvi Divan and Liz Mathew were appointed by the Supreme Court as amicus curia to assist the Court.

Observations of the Supreme Court against High Court’s Decision

The division bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan while setting aside the impugned judgement and order dated October 18, 2023 of the High Court of Calcutta observed that “the division bench has invited a very peculiar concept of “non-exploitative sexual acts” while dealing with the offences punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. We fail to understand how a sexual act, which is heinous offence, can be termed as non-exploitative”.

“When a girl who is fourteen years old is subjected to such a horrific act, how can it be termed as “non-exploitative”? The bench questioned.

The Bench has also invented a non-existent category of “older adolescents” and lamented about the lack of recognition of the consensual behaviour of older adolescents. The bench added that “We fail to understand this concept of “older adolescents”.”

In relation to the observation made by the High Court that by equating Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) no.3 of 2023 etc. Page 16 of 50 consensual and non-exploitative sexual acts with rape and aggravated penetrative sexual assault, the law undermines the bodily integrity and dignity of adolescents, the SC held that “what is shocking is the observation made in paragraph 23 of the impugned judgment where the High Court observed that while achieving ostensible objectives to protect all children below 18 years from sexual exploitation, the law’s unintended effect has been the deprivation of liberty of young people in consensual relationship”

The SC added that “surprisingly, carved out a non-existing category of romantic cases in the rape cases. While dealing with the offences under the POCSO Act, shockingly, the Court observed that the law undermines the identity of adolescent girls by casting them as victims, thereby rendering them voiceless.”

While expressing the disagreement with the observation of the High Court, the bench said that “the judges ought to have avoided expressing their personal views even assuming that there was some justification for holding the views. While the High Court observed this, it forgot that in the facts of the case, the Court was not dealing with the sexual acts involving adolescents above sixteen years, as the age of the victim was fourteen years and the accused was twenty-five years at the relevant time”

“The duty of the High Court was to ascertain on the evidence whether the offences under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Section 376 of the IPC were made out. In view of “sixthly” in Section 375 of the IPC, penetrative intercourse with a woman under eighteen years of age, with or without her consent, constitutes an offence of rape. Therefore, whether such offence arises from a romantic relationship is irrelevant. How can an act that is an offence punishable under the POSCO Act be described as “a romantic relationship”? The High Court went to the extent of observing that the case of criminalisation of a romantic relationship between two adolescents of opposite sex should be best left to the wisdom of the judiciary. The Courts must follow and implement the law. The courts cannot commit violence against the law. The findings and observations in the impugned judgment, except the finding on the applicability of Sections 363 and 366 of the IPC, cannot be sustained” the bench observed.

The division bench while questioning the observation of the High Court, added that “the duty of the High Court was to ascertain on the evidence whether the offences under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Section 376 of the IPC were made out. In view of “sixthly” in Section 375 of the IPC, penetrative intercourse with a woman under eighteen years of age, with or without her consent, constitutes an offence of rape. Therefore, whether such offence arises from a romantic relationship is irrelevant. How can an act that is an offence punishable under the POSCO Act be described as “a romantic relationship”?

“The Courts must follow and implement the law. The courts cannot commit violence against the law. The findings and observations in the impugned judgment, except the finding on the applicability of Sections 363 and 366 of the IPC, cannot be sustained” the bench remarked.

Helpless position of the victim

The division bench expressed concerns over the helpless position of the victim in the present case. Amicus Curiae Madhvi Divan emphasised that no opportunity was made available to the girl of fourteen or fifteen years of age to make an informed choice to decide whether to stay with the accused. She did not get any support from her parents and the State machinery when she required it the most. As held by us hereafter, the State machinery failed to act according to the law to take care of the victim. The situation in which she was placed at that time was such that she had no opportunity to make an informed choice about her future. She had no option but to seek shelter where it was provided to her i.e. in the house of the accused. In any event, it is doubtful whether she could have made an informed choice at the age of fourteen or fifteen.

Decision of the apex court

A division bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan while setting aside the impugned judgement and order dated October 18, 2023 of the High Court of Calcutta, held that “the accused is guilty of the offences punishable under sub-sections (2)(n) and (3) of Section 376 of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The issue regarding sentencing will be considered after the committee’s report is received”.

The bench held that “this extraordinary situation was created because the State machinery did not follow the provisions of law starting from sub-section (6) of Section 19 of the POCSO Act. The importance of rehabilitation of the victims of offences under the POCSO Act, which is a mandatory requirement of law, is being overlooked by all stakeholders. Perhaps, at levels, there is a need for introspection and course correction. We include even the Judiciary in that”.

The Court, while setting aside the impugned judgement and order of the High Court, passed the order that the Government of West Bengal should constitute a committee of three experts, including a clinical psychologist and a social scientist, to assist the victim in making an informed choice regarding her future. This committee will also review the support offered by the State to the victim and her child. The Court directed the State to provide details of the support measures to the committee and ensure that the committee’s recommendations are submitted by October 18, 2024.

The Supreme Court emphasised the need for introspection and course correction by all stakeholders, including the judiciary, in handling cases under the POCSO Act. The Court noted the failure of the State machinery in providing timely support and protection to the victim, which had led to this extraordinary situation

The Judgement can be read here:

Quashing of POCSO cases by High Courts on ground of Compromises

However, on the same page the Rajasthan High Court on January 5, 2024 in Avdhesh Kumar v. State of Rajasthan, SB Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.7901/2023, quashes POCSO case on being informed of victim’s marriage with accused.

The Allahabad High Court also in Gufran Shaikh @ Gani Munawwar v. State of U.P. and Another (Application u/s 482 No. – 10258 of 2021), quashes the POCSO case while observing that “victim-accused living happily as wife-husband”.

The Himachal Pradesh High Court in Ranjeet Kumar Vs State of H.P. & Ors. (Cr.MMO No. 648 of 2023), held that POCSO cases can be quashed if victim & accused reach a genuine compromise.

The Bombay High Court in Shiva Chanappa Odala v. State of Maharashtra & Anr. (Writ Petition No 1366 of 2022), Quashes Sexual Assault Case under POCSO after Child’s Mother Consents.

There are several judgements in which High Courts appear inclined towards principle of compoundability instead of implementing the stringency of the 2006 Act in POCSO cases thereby shrinking the objective of the Act to protect children from sexual exploitation.

Brief about the POCSO Act: The POCSO Act, also known as the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act of 2012, is gender-neutral and recognizes that both any child, irrespective of their gender, can be a survivor of sexual abuse. The Act significantly broadened the definition of what constitutes a sexual offense against a child and imposes harsh punishments for each of the acts enumerated. Additionally, it strengthened the definition of sexual assault to encompass both moderate and severe penetrative assault, along with non-penetrative assaults, and additional sanctions for people in positions of trust or power, such as government workers, faculty, and police officers.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the attempts made by the High Courts across the country in quashing of POCSO cases on view of compromises between victim and accused, has weakened the legislative intent behind the enactment of POCSO, Act 2006. Compromises like marriage between accused and the minor victim, undermines the principles of justice and the rights of victims. The objective behind the POCSO Act’ cannot be ignored merely because abusers marry minor victims to escape conviction.

Related:

1.9 lakh POCSO cases pending in Fast Track Courts: Ministry of Women and Child Development

Accused under POSCO granted bail on condition of marriage to victim: Allahabad HC

BREAKING: SC stays Bombay HC’s controversial POCSO judgment

The post SC: No compromise in POCSO cases, reverses HC verdict appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The post Delhi police file chargesheet against BJP MP Brij Bhushan, submits cancellation report in POCSO Case appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Background:

The survivor boy used to take coaching classes from the accused person. But he started to sexually assault the boy whenever his mother was not present.

The accused tuition teacher was booked under Section 6 of POCSO read with Section 506 of the Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). He was convicted by the lower Court and hence filed an appeal.

Court held:

The Court noted that the survivor boy’s testimony to the doctor and in the trial court was consistent.

 Further, the court noted, “however depraved a person may be to sexually molest another person, he may not be foolish enough to indulge in such an act in open public view. Such offences are committed stealthily or surreptitiously when the survivor is alone or by luring the survivor to a secluded spot.” (Para 19)

The testimony of the boy was completely reliable and it was further corroborated by his medical examination through which evidence of sexual assault was found.

The court also noted that the accused should stop taking the defence of lack of witnesses to sexual assault/ rape. The court said that it is difficult for a child to cook up such stories out of nothing and for the same to be consistently repeated.

“When the survivor is a child, it is difficult to imagine that a story would be conjured up out of nothing and the same would be consistently repeated. Thus, when the survivor is a child of, say, up to 11-12 years of age, unless the court finds the child to be precocious enough to make out a story and consistently repeat the same, the fact that there may not have been any witness to the incident of sexual assault may not, by itself, let the accused off the hook.”(Para 20)

 The High Court did not find any merit in the appeal and upheld the decision by the Trial Court.

Significance of the Judgment:

Section 6 of POCSO discusses the punishment for penetrative sexual assault which ranges 20 years to life imprisonment or death. While section 506 IPC provides punishment for criminal intimidation for two years; or fine.

This judgment is quite significant since, as the court rightly noted, the accused are usually let off the hook for lack of witnesses for their acts. At a time when wrestlers are protesting against inaction/ slow action by the Delhi Police against multiple allegations against the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) Chief, Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh. 10 complaints of molestations and 2 FIRs have been recorded against him. Out of this, one of the survivors is a minor girl and the case has been filed under POCSO Act for aggravated sexual assault.

Aggravated sexual assault is defined under Section 9 and 10 of the POCSO Act. The punishment for which is no less than five years.

The offences under POCSO are cognizable and non-bailable and the accused are usually arrested. A Supreme Court lawyer, Aparna Bhat was quoted by the Print as saying,
“The reason an offence gets identified as aggravated is because of the position a person is holding, because it is a position of trust, and a position of authority in an organisation. In this case, there was a position of trust because he held an official position in an organisation which was supposed to be looking after these wrestlers. These people also knew who this person was, so there are two positions of trust that the accused would have allegedly violated…. Ordinarily, in such cases, the police take action and the person is identified. And then they have to take formal bail from the court.”

The Meghalaya High Court judgment may be read here:

Related:

Seers in Ayodhya raise demands to amend POCSO Act, deem that it is being “misused”

1.9 lakh POCSO cases pending in Fast Track Courts: Ministry of Women and Child Development

“I changed my statement because I was scared, my family is living under constant threat”: father of the minor wrestlers’ complainant

Protesting wrestling champs meet union sports minister, 2nd meet with govt in 5 days

FIRs suggest wrestlers had informed PM about their repeated sexual trauma in 2021

Battling the Indian sports industry: the cries for justice by women

Protests and Mahapanchayats announced in support of the protesting wrestlers, 5 days given till medals are immersed in Ganga River

Wrestler Protest: Law student moves NHRC, files complaint over the detention & brutal police action against protesting wrestlers

The post POCSO: lack of witness not a ground for acquittal, says Meghalaya HC appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In a shocking incident in Rewa, Madhya Pradesh, a 26-year-old man accused of rape, who was out on bail raped the same survivor again.

The accused who is said to be a resident of Khatkari village was arrested last year on September 23, but was let out upon being granted bail last week. On August 26, the man reportedly abducted the girl as she was on her way for some household work. He took her to a deserted place where he allegedly threatened and raped her.

According to Additional Superintendent of Police Vivek Lal, the girl’s family filed a complaint and the accused was arrested the next day. He was booked under relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

For an accused in a case to not only move around freely, but to sexually assault the same survivor again is not only shocking but deeply concerning.

Similar concerns were raised in December 2019, after a 23-year-old rape survivor was set ablaze in Unnao by the accused in the case. The incident took place at Sindupur village under the Bihar Police station area on December 5, when the survivor was on her way to Rai Bareilly for a hearing in the case. The victim has sustained 80% burns and was admitted to the Trauma Center of the King George Medical University, Lucknow. She was then airlifted to Safdarjung Hospital in New Delhi where she succumbed to her injuries two days later.

Related:

Unnao rape survivor set ablaze by accused!

The post Rape accused allegedly rapes survivor again upon being granted bail appeared first on SabrangIndia.

New Delhi: Police have detained and started investigation against a Chitradurga-based prominent Lingayat mutt seer Shivamurthy Murugha Sharanaru on Monday for alleged sexual abuse of minor girls, according to reports. The Mysuru police registered a case under the POCSO Act against the Murugha Mutt seer on Sunday.

The case has been registered at the Nazarbad Police Station in Mysuru, based on a complaint by an officer of the District Child Protection Unit, The Hindu reported. The warden of a hostel run by the mutt was among the five accused, police sources told PTI. The seer was detained after the case was transferred to the Chitradurga police.

The police said the complaint is based on the statement of the two girls who accused the seer of ‘sexually abusing’ them for nearly couple of years now and others of allegedly cooperating with the act, PTI reported.

The girls reportedly approached the ‘Odanadi Seva Samsthe’, a Mysuru-based NGO, and narrated their ordeal during counselling on Friday night. Following this, the organisation approached the authorities.

The two girl victims then reached Chitradurga on Saturday night and were placed in the district Bala Mandira and brought to the child welfare committee. Their statement was recorded before the child welfare committee and the district police, following which a medical examination was conducted on them at the district hospital.

According to the police complaint, the girls are aged 15 and 16 and were staying at the hostel run by the Murugha Mutt. The two were sexually abused for over three-and-a-half-years, as per an India Today report.

The Chitradurga police have also registered a complaint against S K Basavarajan, former MLA and administrator of the mutt, on charges of kidnapping the victims and trying to sexually assault a woman warden of the said hostel, The Hindu reported.

The case against S K Basavarajan was registered by the warden of Muruga Mutt at Chitradurga rural police station under IPC Sec 354(A),504,506,363, & u/s 120(B), India Today reported. The warden alleged that the two minor girls from the Muruga Mutt hostel were kidnapped and later found at Cottonpet Police Station in Bengaluru. She alleged that Basavarajan has been accused of sexually abusing the children and the warden from the day he took over as administrator of the Muruga Mutt.

Protests in City

The city saw two different protests seeking justice for the seer and the victims, according to The Hindu‘s report. While one group comprising some seers and politicians protested the seer’s arrest and claimed that allegations against him were false and baseless, the other group of protesters held a demonstration before the child welfare committee and demanded a fair and transparent probe. Some protesters belonging to the latter group also demanded a judicial probe into the case citing a lack of confidence in the local police. 

There is a possibility of the provisions of the Prevention of Atrocities against SC/STs Act being invoked against the seer because one of the victims is from the Scheduled Caste.

Meanwhile, Murugha Sharanaru has responded to the allegations claiming they were a part of a “big conspiracy” against him, according to The Hindu.

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post Karnataka: Police Detain Chief Seer of Lingayat Mutt for Alleged Sexual Abuse of Minors appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Delhi High Court expressed concerns over the potential psychological impact on a survivor of Child Sexual Abuse (CSA) when they are required to be present in court during bail hearings for the alleged abuser. This is because the arguments often vary from allegations, accusations, doubting integrity and outright character assassination, even when the survivor is a minor and the alleged abuser is being tried under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO), which is the central legislation dealing with sexual offences against children.

The HC was hearing an interlocutory application asking for suspension of sentence of a POCSO accused as he has served a substantial portion of his sentence that was prescribed by the trial court. The court imposed several restrictions on the accused who is the father of prosecutrix (the survivor) such as – that the he shall not visit his family in Rajasthan, that he should visit the police station every Monday, that he shall not contact any members of the survivor’s family.

On receiving some suggested practices from the side of appellant over in light of the fact that many of the victims in POCSO cases were being made to appear physically or virtually in Court at the time of hearing of the bail applications, the court said in its order, “This has led to a situation where the victims are being forced not only potentially interact with the accused person, but also be present in Court when the arguments regarding the offence are being taken up for hearing. The psychological impact on a POCSO victim being present in Court is immensely grave as the arguments vary from allegations, accusations, doubting integrity, character etc. The prosecutrix/ victim is forced to be present in the Court with the accused that is the same person who allegedly has violated her.”

The court sent the suggested guidelines to Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee (DHCLSC) and Delhi Legal Services Authority (DLSA) for their input.

Section 33 of the act states that the special court that has taken cognizance of an offence, should create a child friendly atmosphere in courts. Section 36 of the act states that the child should not see the accused during testifying or presenting any evidence in the court. This section allows the usage of single visibility mirrors and curtains for the purpose of realising the purpose of the section. It says —

“(1) The Special Court shall ensure that the child is not exposed in anyway to the accused at the time of recording of the evidence, while at the same time ensuring that the accused is in a position to hear the statement of the child and communicate with his advocate.

(2) For the purposes of sub-section (1), the Special Court may record the statement of a child through video conferencing or by utilising single visibility mirrors or curtains or any other device.”

 Section 37 of the POCSO Act states that the trials be conducted in Camera and parents or person the child has trust or confidence in, be present. It says-

“The Special Court shall try cases in camera and in the presence of the parents of the child or any other person in whom the child has trust or confidence:

Provided that where the Special Court is of the opinion that the child needs to be examined at a place other than the court, it shall proceed to issue a commission in accordance with the provisions of section 284 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)”

These provisions were included in the act so that the child is not put through the trauma once again during the process of trial and a child friendly environment can be created. The case will be listed on 30th August again for further directions.

The full order may be read here: 

Related:

Jubilee Hills gang rape case: POCSO court to begin trial soon

Women and children targeted at public toilets, Mumbai POCSO Court suggests appointing women security guards

The post Delhi HC expresses concerns over presence of CSA survivor at the time of POCSO bail hearings appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Hyderabad: The trial in the sensational Jubilee Hills minor girl gang rape case is all set to commence in couple of weeks as the special court for POCSO cases has taken cognizance of the charge-sheet filed by the Jubilee Hills police.

In last week of July the police succeeded in filing the 600 pages charge sheet within a span of 56 days. Since the five accused are minors and one is an adult, the police submitted the charge sheets before the Juvenile Justice Board and before the POCSO court.

The police have recorded the statements of as many as 65 witnesses.

On May 28, a minor girl was allegedly gang raped by a group of youths including five minor children and a major youth after a non-alocholic party at a pub at
upscale area of Jubilee Hills.  The police have arrested the youths and also seized their cars.

The investigation into the rape case including the Test Identification parade, recording of the statement of the victim under CrPc section 164 before the magistrate, con ducting of DNA test and forensic examintaion of the car used inthe crime  was completed a chargesheet was filed upon which the POCSO court took cognizance. Soon the charges may be framed against all the accused persons.

Courtesy: The Daily Siasat

The post Jubilee Hills gang rape case: POCSO court to begin trial soon appeared first on SabrangIndia.