Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
A.K.MOHAPATRA
Victim/Informant – Appellant
Versus
State of Orissa – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenges against court order for video conferencing. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner argues for virtual testimony due to threats. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. state's counterclaims of petitioner’s dishonesty. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. court's authority to secure justice using inherent powers. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. child-centric approach in pocso act emphasized. (Para 21 , 22 , 25) |
| 6. order to allow virtual examination through proper application. (Para 33) |
Judgment :
A.K. Mohapatra, J.
1. The present CRLMC application has been filed by the Petitioner challenging the order dated 02.09.2024 passed by the AD HOC ADJ-FTSC POCSO-II, Cuttack, along with an additional prayer to direct the said AD HOC ADJ-FTSC POCSO-II, Cuttack to examine the Victim the means of Video Conferencing (VC) in the Special G.R. Case No.30 of 2023 corresponding to Salepur P.S. Case No.54 of 2023 which has been filed for commission of offences under Sections 363/ 344/ 366/ 376(3) of the I.P.C read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 20212.
FACTS OF THE CASE
2. The background of the case giving rise to the present application, is as follows; Earlier on the 16th of February 2023 at around 5:50 pm in the afternoo
The POCSO Act mandates the protection of minor victims during trials, allowing testimonies via video conferencing to ensure psychological safety and prevent exposure to the accused.
The rejection of a minor victim's request for video conferencing testimony was overturned to ensure the protection and dignity of vulnerable witnesses under the POCSO Act, highlighting the judiciary'....
Point of law: POCSO Act – To appoint competent Special Public Prosecutors exclusively attached to the Special Courts dealing with matters under the POCSO Act, so that the time-frame under Section 35 ....
(1) Statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. made in the course of investigation by the victim child, cannot be considered as evidence recorded under Section 35 of POCSO Act.(2) If there is a ....
In child sexual offence trials, recall of witnesses under Section 348 BNSS rejected for vague claims of inadequate prior cross-examination, counsel change, and delay; prioritizes child victim's prote....
The court held that the accused has a right to cross-examine the victim, but restrictions apply to protect minors, emphasizing the need for relevance and care in questioning under the provisions of S....
The right to a fair trial includes the opportunity for the accused to cross-examine witnesses, and the trial court's failure to adhere to this principle necessitates remanding the case for proper pro....
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
