IN RE: Right to Privacy of Adolescents vs .

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(SC) 675

ABHAY S. OKA, UJJAL BHUYAN
IN RE: Right to Privacy of Adolescents – Appellant
Versus
. – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
Ms. Madhavi Divan, Sr. Adv. (Amicus Curiae) Ms. Liz Mathew, Sr. Adv. (Amicus Curiae) Ms. Nidhi Khanna, AOR Mr. Sameer Choudhary, Adv. Ms. Aishani Narain, Adv. Ms. Aandrita Deb, Adv. Ms. Bagavathy Vennimalai, Adv. Ms. Mallika Agarwal, Adv.
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Huzefa Ahmadi, Sr. Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Adv. Mr. Shreyas Awasthi, Adv. Ms. Rashmi Singh, Adv. Ms. Lihzu Shiney Konyak, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Abhijit Sengupta, AOR Mr. Huzefa Ahmadi, Sr. Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Adv. Mr. Shreyas Awasthi, Adv. Ms. Rashmi Singh, Adv. Ms. Lihzu Shiney Konyak, Adv.

Judgement Key Points

What is the legal effect of Section 19(6) of the POCSO Act and its implementation by the State and CWC in protecting child victims? What is the proper scope of High Court power under Article 226/482 to quash prosecutions in POSCO-related cases where offences under POCSO Act and IPC are established? What are the requirements for rehabilitation and aftercare of child victims under the JJ Act and how should Courts ensure informed choices for victims and their children?

What is the legal effect of Section 19(6) of the POCSO Act and its implementation by the State and CWC in protecting child victims?

What is the proper scope of High Court power under Article 226/482 to quash prosecutions in POSCO-related cases where offences under POCSO Act and IPC are established?

What are the requirements for rehabilitation and aftercare of child victims under the JJ Act and how should Courts ensure informed choices for victims and their children?

JUDGMENT

ABHAY S. OKA, J.

FACTUAL ASPECTS

1. Criminal Appeal no. 1451 of 2024 has been preferred by the State of West Bengal, aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 18th October 2023, passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta. The learned Special Judge appointed under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, ‘the POCSO Act’), Baruipur, South 24 Parganas, convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘the IPC’). For the offence punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, the accused was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for twenty years and pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-. He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for four and five years, respectively, for the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 366 of the IPC. Though the learned Special Judge under the POCSO Act concluded that the accused was guilty of the offences punishable under clause (n) of sub-section (2) and sub-section (3) of Section 376 of the IPC, in view of the sentence imposed for the offence punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, no separate

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2024 Supreme(SC) 675

ABHAY S. OKA, UJJAL BHUYANIN RE: Right to Privacy of Adolescents – AppellantVersus. – Respondent

What is the legal effect of Section 19(6) of the POCSO Act and its implementation by the State and CWC in protecting child victims?

What is the proper scope of High Court power under Article 226/482 to quash prosecutions in POSCO-related cases where offences under POCSO Act and IPC are established?

What are the requirements for rehabilitation and aftercare of child victims under the JJ Act and how should Courts ensure informed choices for victims and their children?

Cases Referred (1)

ABHAY S. OKA, UJJAL BHUYAN
IN RE: Right to Privacy of Adolescents – Appellant
Versus
. – Respondent