Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
PC – Appellant
Versus
State Of NCT of Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J
1. By way of the present petition, the petitioner seeks setting aside of the order dated 13.12.2024 [hereafter "impugned order"], passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTSC) (POCSO)- 03, South West, Dwarka Courts, Delhi, [hereafter "Trial Court"] in SC No. 682/2022, titled as "State of NCT of Delhi v. Vinay Malhotra ", by way of which the learned Trial Court was pleased to close the evidence of the petitioner-victim.
2. Briefly stated, the petitioner-victim had filed a complaint on the basis of which FIR No. 290/2022, dated 28.06.2022 at Police Station Dwarka, Delhi, for offence punishable under Sections 328/376/384/506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 [hereafter "IPC"], with later addition of Sections 379/384/506 of IPC and Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 [hereafter "POCSO Act"]. The learned Trial Court had passed an order on charge on 01.12.2023, directing framing of charge. The victim's examination-in-chief was recorded on 03.02.2024 and she was partly cross-examined on 24.02.2024. On 20.03.2024, charges under Sections 5(1) and 5(p) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act were added under Section 216 of Cr.
The closure of a child victim's cross-examination in a sexual assault case was ruled unjustified, emphasizing the necessity of safeguarding procedural rights and ensuring a fair trial under the POCSO....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the right to cross-examine the victim under the POSCO Act and the importance of maintaining a child-friendly atmosphere in court.
The right to cross-examine witnesses is essential for a fair trial, and courts must balance this right with the need for expeditious proceedings.
(1) Examination of child victim – Once individual crosses statutory threshold of eighteen years and becomes adult, very rationale underpinning procedural shield falls away – It would be a legal incon....
The court affirmed that victims of sexual assault should not undergo repeated cross-examination, emphasizing the need for fair trial rights while protecting vulnerable witnesses.
The denial of an accused's right to cross-examine the victim in a POCSO case undermines the fairness of the trial, warranting remand for further examination.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
