Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

"Failure to Report Offenses under POCSO Act: Doctors' Responsibility, Ignorance Not Accepted: Karnataka HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Karnataka HC has underscored the seriousness of failure to report offenses under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses (POCSO) Act. The judgment specifically highlights the responsibility of doctors in reporting such offenses and emphasizes the need for strict compliance with Section 19 of the Act. The court rejected the defence of ignorance and urged doctors to fulfil their reporting obligations without fail.

According to the judgment, the case involved a gynaecologist who claimed to be unaware of the victim's age, which was crucial in determining the severity of the offense. However, the court declined to accept the defence, stating that it was highly improbable for an experienced doctor not to recognize the victim's tender age and the signs of sexual abuse.

The court quoted previous judgments, including one that highlighted the importance of reporting offenses, especially by doctors. In this regard, the court stated, "Failure to report offense under the POCSO Act is a serious crime and an attempt to shield the offenders. Strict compliance with Section 19 and reporting of offenses is crucial to prevent child abuse and protect the rights and well-being of minors."

The court also referred to Section 21 of the POCSO Act, which imposes punishment, including imprisonment for up to six months or a fine, for the failure to report offenses. Despite the relatively short duration of imprisonment, the court emphasized that the nature of the offense itself warranted serious consideration.

Furthermore, the judgment cited the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which places a specific duty on the state to protect children from all forms of sexual exploitation and abuse. The court highlighted the need for doctors to fulfill their reporting obligations, as non-reporting not only shields offenders but also undermines the objectives of the POCSO Act.

High court directed strict compliance with Section 19, particularly by doctors involved in the medical termination of pregnancies of minors. The judgment serves as a reminder that reporting offenses under the POCSO Act is a critical responsibility that should not be taken lightly. The court's observations, while specific to the petitioner's case, hold significant implications for all cases falling under the purview of the Act.

DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF JUNE, 2023

CHANDRASHEKAR T.B.vs  STATE OF KARNATAKA

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Dr.-Chandershekhar-Vs-State-Karntakta-HC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News