0

The POCSO case against man dismissed by Rajasthan High Court because victim claims she was not abducted forcibly

Blog, blog ,

TITLE: Ankit Jatav v. State Of Rajasthan & Anr.

Decided on: 31/05/2023

CRLMP-3075/2023

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR

Facts of the case:

Prayer is for quashing of FIR No.129/2021 registered with Police Station Maangrol, Baran for offence under Section 363 of IPC, however cognizance has been taken under Sections 366, 376, 376(2)(n) and Section 5(1)(j)(ii) and Section 6 of The POCSO Act. According to FIR, the minor girl of the informant left house on 11.04.2021 along with her friend, thereafter she did not return. It was suspected that she was induced to go. On 09.03.2022 the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. She stated that she was in love with the petitioner and she left the house along with the petitioner to marry. Thereafter, they married in a temple and thereafter with her consent physical relation between the two was established.

Argument from the Petitioner side:

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and the victim were blessed with a child also. In identical facts and circumstances of the case, to protect the matrimonial life, a bench of this Court quashed the FIR to prevent abuse of the process of law.

Judgement

Considering, the fact that the victim had never alleged that she was forcefully kidnapped. No physical relation was with the petitioner when she was a minor. The two have already married and are having a child. In the circumstance, continuance of criminal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law. Hence, aforesaid FIR and the entire criminal proceedings arising out of the said FIR stands hereby quashed and the instant petition is accordingly allowed. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by: Mahima Saini

Click to view judgment

 

0

Karnataka High Court Denies Plea to Quash FIR Against Gynecologist under Section 21 of POCSO Act for Failure to Report Sexual Assault on a Minor

Blog , , ,

Karnataka High Court

Chandrashekar T.B. v. State of Karnataka & Devika

Bench-  HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA

WRIT PETITION No.8789 OF 2023 (GM – RES)

Decided On 02-06-2023

Facts of the case-

The petitioner, a retired doctor now running Prashanthi Hospital in Laxmisha Nagara, Chikkamagaluru, is the subject of a crime registration. On 17-12-2022, between 13:00 to 14:00 hours, the victim, Devica arrived at the petitioner’s hospital seeking treatment.

The victim was in critical condition with severe bleeding and decreased vitals, allegedly caused by taking abortion tablets 2 to 3 days prior. Accompanying the victim were individuals claiming to be her parents.

The petitioner promptly admitted the patient to the hospital and provided immediate medical intervention, including oxygen and IV fluids, which improved the victim’s condition. However, it is claimed that the petitioner performed an incomplete medical termination of pregnancy, leaving the placenta behind.

Due to the victim’s instability and ongoing bleeding, the petitioner performed a procedure to retain the placenta, as further expulsion would have endangered the victim’s life. After approximately two days of admission, once the victim’s condition stabilized, she was discharged in the morning and taken by her purported relatives.

Around one month later, Crime No.1 of 2023 was registered at Belthangadi Police Station for the aforementioned offenses. Initially, the petitioner was not named as an accused party. Following an investigation, a notice was issued to the petitioner on 17-02-2023, accusing them of performing a medical termination of pregnancy on a 12-year and 11-month-old victim who had been subjected to sexual activity.

The petitioner was charged under Section 21 of the relevant Act. Subsequently, on 26-02-2023, a charge sheet was filed against other accused parties as well as the petitioner/accused No.8 for the offense under Section 21 of the Act. The filing of this charge sheet has prompted the petitioner to approach the court through the present petition.

Relevant Provisions

POCSO ACT, 2012 Related to
Sec. 21 Punishment for failure to report or record a case

Judgement

The court has dismissed the plea of the accused, a gynecologist, and expressed strong dissatisfaction with the accused’s failure to recognize the victim’s age during the medical termination of pregnancy, despite having 35 years of experience in the field. The bench emphasized that such a lapse in judgment by a seasoned professional is unacceptable.

Furthermore, the court highlighted the significant concern that non-reporting of cases involving minors and their exploitation would allow offenders to evade legal consequences. This directly undermines the core objective of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses (POCSO) Act, which aims to safeguard the rights and well-being of minors. The court emphasized the need for strict adherence to reporting protocols to ensure that offenders are held accountable and justice is served.

The dismissal of the accused’s plea and the court’s strong remarks reflect the gravity of the situation and the court’s commitment to upholding the principles of justice, protection, and deterrence in cases involving the exploitation of minors.

JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY ABHAY SHUKLA

Click here to view judgment

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

0

No mercy will be extended to someone who violates the POCSO Act: Gujarat High Court denies the request for bail

Blog ,

NIHAR RANJITBHAI BARAD V STATE OF GUJARAT

PRESIDED BY: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMIR J. DAVE

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 18985 of 202

Date: 30/11/2022

Facts

The victim in this instance is 12 years old, and the accused is accused of violating Sections 10 and 18 of the POCSO Act as well as Section 354-A of the Penal Code, 1860.  Section 10 of POCSO Act deals with punishment for aggravated sexual assault which is not less than 5 years but may extend to 7 years. Section 18 of the POCSO Act states that whoever attempts to commit an offence shall be punished with imprisonment of any description provided for the offence, for a term which may extend to one-half of the imprisonment for life or, as the case may be, one-half of the longest term of imprisonment provided for that offence or with fine or with both. Section 354-A of IPC deals with sexual harassment and punishment for sexual harassment.

The accused submitted an application under Section 439 of CrPC to get standard bail.  Section 439 states confers special powers on the Court of Sessions as well as the High Court where either court may direct to release a person on bail.

Judgement

The court held that the POCSO Act was passed to protect children from sexual assault, sexual harassment, and pornographic offences and to establish special tribunals for the trial of such crimes. A clear message that anyone who violates the POCSO Act will be held accountable for their actions must be sent to society at large by imposing a penalty that is proportionate to the act of sexual assault or sexual harassment.

The Court stated that, “Cases of sexual assault or sexual harassment on the children are instances of perverse lust for sex where even innocent children are not spared in pursuit of such debased sexual pleasure. It is to be noted that children are precious human resources of our country; they are the country’s future. The hope of tomorrow rests on them. But unfortunately, in our country, a girl child is in a very vulnerable position. There are different modes of her exploitation, including sexual assault and/or sexual abuse. The exploitation of children in such a manner is a crime against humanity and society. Therefore, the children and more particularly the girl child deserve full protection and need greater care and protection whether in the urban or rural areas. Children need special care and protection and, in such cases, responsibility on the shoulders of the Courts is more onerous to provide proper legal protection to these children. A minor who is subjected to sexual abuse needs to be protected even more than a major victim because a major victim being an adult may still be able to withstand the social rationalization and mental harassment meted out by society, but a minor victim will find it difficult to do so. Most crimes against minor victims are not even reported very often, the perpetrator of the crime is a member of the family of the victim or a close friend. Therefore, the child needs extra protection.”

 The Court further observed that the victim was a 12-year-old child, and the offender was a teacher.. Protective behaviour from the teacher is expected. Instead of providing the child with fatherly love, affection, and protection from the vices of society, the accused made her a victim of lust. The victim will be affected psychologically and emotionally for the rest of her life by the accused’s awful actions. When a trustworthy individual commits crimes like this, children begin to view life more pessimistically. In this instance, social values have been compromised and trust has been betrayed. As a result, the accused is not deserving of mercy or compassion.

The Court further opined that practice of amicable settlement is unwarranted when such a serious and heinous crime is committed. It also amounts to tampering with the witness or evidence by the accused. Such a heinous crime affects the entire society, and the relation between ‘Guru’ and ‘Disciples’ should be viewed very strictly. 

Hence, the Court held that the prima facie case has been clearly established against the accused and rejected the bail application. 

JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY AMIT ARAVIND

click here to view judgement

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

1 2