IMPORTANT POINT
The POCSO Act does not require immediate reporting of offences; reasonable delay due to intervening circumstances does not constitute a failure under Sections 19 and 21(1).

ORDER :

1. Petitioners herein are accused nos. 2 and 3 in Crime No. 422/2019 of Alappuzha South Police Station, which is now pending before the Special Court under the POCSO Act, Alappuzha as S.C. No. 666/2020. The petitioners seek quashment of the said crime on various counts. The offences alleged are under Section 21(1), read with Section 19 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor on behalf of the respondents. Perused the records.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that for attracting the offence under Section 21(1) of the POCSO Act, there should be failure on the part of the person/accused to report the commission of offence as enjoined by Section 19 of the POCSO Act. Referring to Section 19, learned counsel would submit that there is no mandate that such crime shall be reported forthwith. In the instant case, the incident occurred on 07.03.2019 and the same was reported by the petitioners (accused nos. 2 and 3) on 11.03.2019. There was neither any failure to report the incident; nor was there any serious delay in such reporting. Therefore, the offences sought to be canvassed against the petitioners will not lie, is the short submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. On facts, it was explained that the incident allegedly took place on 07.03.2019 and the same was reported by the parents of the victim on the same day. The school centenary celebration stood scheduled to 08.03.2019, which was a Friday. 9th and 10th of March, 2019 being Saturday and Sunday, were holidays. The matter was reported to the Child Line on the next working, that is Monday. On such premise, the learned counsel would submit that there is no serious delay in reporting the matter.

4. Per contra, this application was seriously opposed by the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. It was pointed out that, going by the spirit of Section 19, the reporting enjoined therein should be done forthwith, as otherwise, the purpose of such reporting may perhaps be defeated. In this case, learned Public Prosecutor would point out that the incident was reported to the petitioners on the very same day. However, the petitioners failed to inform the same to the concerned, as required by Section 19, either on the same day, or at least on the next day. It is after three days, that the matter was reported. In such circumstances, the offence will lie, is the submission made. At any rate, the same is not liable to be quashed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is the final submission made by the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective sides, this Court finds merit in the instant miscellaneous case. Section 19 of the POCSO Act, to the extent it is relevant, is extracted here-below:

“19. Reporting of offences:

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) any person (including the child), who has apprehension that an offence under this Act is likely to be committed or has knowledge that such an offence has been committed, he shall provide such information to:

(a) the Special Juvenile Police Unit.

(b) the local police

xxxx xxxx xxxx

(6) The Special Juvenile Police Unit or local police shall, without unnecessary delay but within a period of twenty-four hours, report the matter to the Child Welfare Committee and the Special Court or where no Special Court has been designated, to the Court of Session, including need of the child for care and protection and steps taken in this regard.

xxxx.”

Similarly, 21(1) of the POCSO Act, is also extracted here-below:

“21. Punishment for failure to report or record a case:

(1) Any person, who fails to report the commission of an offence under sub-section (1) of section 19 or section 20 or who fails to record such offence under sub-section (2) of section 19 shall be punished with imprisonment of either description which may extend to six months or with fine or with both.”

A perusal of the ab