SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
RANJAN GOGOI, CJI., DEEPAK GUPTA, SANJIV KHANNA, JJ.
RE: ALARMING RISE IN THE NUMBER OF REPORTED CHILD RAPE INCIDENTS
SUO MOTO WRIT (CRIMINAL) NO.1/2019
WITH W.P.(C) No.819/2019 (PIL-W)
Decided On : 13-11-2019
POCSO Act, 2012 - Order - Alarming rise in number of reported child rape incidents – Assault - Sexual Assault - Sexual Harassment - Use of Children for Pornography – Abetment - It appears that at all stages of dealing with POCSO cases commencing with investigation up to stage of trial, time lines stipulated under Act have not been complied with - It appears that one major reason for inability of stake holders to meet deadline stipulated under Act, is lack of awareness and lack of dedication in completing investigation, etc. within time frame stipulated and also inadequacy of number of courts which has resulted in cases remaining pending beyond period mandated for completion of trial under Act – Held, Court direct all State Governments as well as Union of India to do what is required to be done to ensure that all stages of investigation as well as trial, as contemplated under Act, are completed within time frame by creation of additional force for investigation. Court further direct Union of India and State Governments to take steps for sensitization of officials associated with investigation and also for creation or assignment of dedicated courts to try POCSO cases on top priority so that charge-sheets are filed within mandatory period and trials are completed within time frame contemplated under Act – Ordered accordingly.
ORDER :
We have gone through the report of Shri Surinder S. Rathi, Registrar of the Supreme Court. In paragraphs 7.1 to 7.9 of the said Report, the relevant figures are mentioned, hich are being extracted below:-
“7.1 Percentage share of different types of offences under POCSO (National Analysis):
| POCSO Offence | Rounded Percentage |
| Penetrative Sexual Assault {S.4} Aggravated Penetrative Sexual | 32.1 24 |
| Assault {S.6} Sexual Assault {S.8} Aggravated Sexual Assault {S.10} Sexual Harassment {S.12} Use of Children for Pornography {S.14 & 15} Abetment {S.17} |
31 3 8 1 2 |
| 7.2 Gender-wise percentage of victimisation under POCSO FIRs: | |
| Girl Boy Other | 80% 6% 14% |
| 7.3 Age profile of Victims under POCSO: | |
| 0-6 yrs | 4% |
| 6-12 yrs | 13% |
| 13-16 yrs | 60% |
| 16-18 yrs | 22% |
| 7.4 Whether accused is Known/Stranger or Relative of victim: | |
| Friends & Neighbours | 27% |
| Relatives | 7% |
| School Staff | 1% |
| Other known person | 56% |
| Stranger | 9% |
| 7.5 Time taken in completion of investigation: | |
| Within 30 days | 18% |
| 31-60 days | 17% |
| 61-180 days | 29% |
| 181-365 days | 16% |
| More than one year | 20% |
| 7.6 Time taken by Police in depositing Samples with FSL Laboratory: | |
| Within 30 days | 51% |
| 31-60 days | 19% |
| 61-180 days | 17% |
| 181-365 days | 6% |
| More than one year | 7% |
| 7.7 Percentage of cases in which support person is provided: | |
| Support Person not provided | 96% |
| Support Person provided | 4% |
| 7.8 Percentage of cases in which interim compensation/final compensation provided: | |
| Interim Compensation NOT provided | 99% |
| Interim Compensation provided | 1% |
| Final Compensation NOT provided | 99% |
| Final Compensation provided | 1% |
| 7.9 Pendency of POCSO Cases in percentage (Sec.35(2) mandates trial to be completed within one year): | |
| Pending for more than 4 years | 8% |
| Pending for 3-4 years | 10% |
| Pending for 2-3 years | 17% |
| Pending for 1-2 years | 28% |
| Pending for less than 1 year | 37% |
This report shows a shocking state of affairs. What to talk of trials, in 20% of the cases even investigation is not completed within one year. Virtually, no support persons are provided and no compensation is paid to the victims. Almost two-third of the cases are pending trial for more than one year.
It appears that at all stages of dealing with POCSO cases commencing with the investigation up to the stage of trial, the time lines stipulated under the Act have not been complied with. From the report of Shri Rathi, it appears that one major reason for the inability of the stake holders to meet the deadline stipulated under the Act, is lack of awareness and lack of dedication in completing investigation, etc. within the time frame stipulated and also inadequacy of the number of courts which has resulted in cases remaining pending beyond the period mandated for completion of trial under the Act.
We hope and expect that the Central Government will play a much more proactive role to ensure that trials of cases arising out of the POCSO Act are completed in the time frame laid down in the Act.
We direct all the State Governments as well as the Union of India to do what is required to be done to ensure that all stages of investigation as well as trial, as contemplated under the Act, are completed within the time frame by creation of additional force for investigation. We further direct the Union of India and the State Governments to take steps for sensitization of officials associated with the investigation and also for creation or assignment of dedicated courts to try POCSO cases on top priority so that charge-sheets are filed within the mandatory period and trials are completed within the time frame contemplated under the Act.
Report of the action taken will be placed before this Court and will be considered by a Be
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.