SC decides not to sentence POCSO convict, noting victim didn't see it as crime

The Supreme Court in on Friday (May 23) decided not to impose a sentence on a man convicted in a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, stating that even though the incident was a crime in the eyes of the law, but the victim did not view it as a crime, and instead had become “emotionally attached” to the accused.

The bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan pronounced the verdict by invoking Article 142 of the Constitution (power to do complete justice).

How SC took up the case?

The accused, who was 24 years old at the time of the offence, was earlier convicted on charges of engaging in a sexual relationship with a minor girl. He married her after she attained adulthood and now the two live together with their child.

The case came to the Supreme Court after the Calcutta High Court in 2023 acquitted the man. The High Court, in its judgement, remarked that adolescent girls should control their sexual urges.

It was at this juncture that the Supreme Court took note of the case. It set aside the Calcutta High Court’s judgement and reinstated the man’s conviction but did not pronounce a sentence on him.

Also Read: SC says maternity leave vital part of woman’s reproductive rights, can’t be denied

Expert committee report

The Supreme Court directed the West Bengal Government to set up a committee of experts including members from institutions like NIMHANS or TISS, and a child welfare officer who would monitor a fact-finding process to evaluate the victim’s current situation and her take on the case.

The committee submitted its report in a sealed envelope on April 3 this year. Upon reviewing the report and speaking to the victim, the top court said that she needed financial assistance and advised vocational training or part-time employment to be considered for her after the completion of her class 10 board examination.

"She did not have the opportunity to make an informed choice earlier. The system failed her at multiple levels," the court said as quoted by Live Law.

Also Read: SC issues notice to Centre following PIL seeking regulation of betting apps

‘Legal system failed her’

The top court further stated "The society judged her, the legal system failed her, and her own family abandoned her.”

“That is the reason we are giving for exercising power under Article 142 not to impose sentence,” said Justice Oka.

The court stated though the incident was a crime as per law, the victim did not see it as one adding it was rather the consequences that caused her more trauma.

"The final report concludes that though the incident is seen as crime in law the victim did not accept it as one. The committee records that it was not the legal crime that caused any trauma to the victim but rather it was the consequence that followed which took a toll on her. What she had to face as a consequence was the police, the legal system, and constant battle to save the accused from punishment", the court observed.