Summary Security Force Court Lacks Jurisdiction Over Civil Offences Beyond Simple Hurt And Theft: High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh Vague Allegations Cannot Dissolve a Sacred Marital Relationship: Karnataka High Court Upholds Dismissal of Divorce Petition Daughters Entitled to Coparcenary Rights in Ancestral Property under Hindu Succession Act, 2005 Amendment: Madras High Court Divorce | False Allegations of Domestic Violence and Paternity Questions Amount to Mental Cruelty: Madhya Pradesh High Court Hostile Witness Testimony Admissible if Corroborated by Independent Evidence: Punjab and Haryana High Court Fraud Must Be Specifically Pleaded and Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt to Invalidate Registered Documents: Andhra Pradesh High Court Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Rash Driving Conviction But Grants Probation to First-Time Offender Bus Driver Orissa High Court Upholds Life Imprisonment for Husband Convicted of Wife's Murder Merit Cannot Be Sacrificed for Procedural Technicalities in NEET UG Admissions: Rajasthan High Court Patna High Court Upholds Partition Decrees: Unregistered Partition Deed Inadmissible, Fails to Prove Prior Partition - Joint Hindu Family Property Presumed Undivided: Patna High Court Section 195(1)(b) CrPC | Judicial Integrity Cannot Be Undermined: Supreme Court Restores Evidence Tampering Case In a NDPS Case Readiness and Willingness, Not Time, Decide Equity in Sale Agreements: Supreme Court Denies Specific Performance Prolonged Detention Violates Fundamental Rights Under Article 21: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail in Money Laundering Case DV ACT | Economic Abuse Includes Alienation of Assets, Necessitating Protection Orders: Allahabad High Court Illegal Structures to Face Demolition: Bombay HC Directs Strict Action Against Unauthorized Constructions Justice Must Extend to the Last Person Behind Bars: Supreme Court Pushes for Full Implementation of BNSS Section 479 to Relieve Undertrial Prisoners Efficiency Over Central Oversight: Supreme Court Asserts Need for Localized SIT in Chennai Case Partition, Not Injunction, Is Remedy for Joint Property Disputes: P&H High Court Dismisses Plea Subsequent Purchaser Can Question Plaintiff’s Intent: MP High Court Clarifies Specific Relief Act Trademark Pirates Face Legal Wrath: Delhi HC Enforces Radio Mirchi’s IP Rights Swiftly Madras High Court Upholds Extended Adjudication Period Under Customs Act Amid Allegations of Systemic Lapses Disputes Over Religious Office Will Be Consolidated for Efficient Adjudication, Holds Karnataka High Court Motive Alone, Without Corroborative Evidence, Insufficient for Conviction : High Court Acquits Accused in 1993 Murder Case Himachal Pradesh HC Criticizes State for Delays: Orders Timely Action on Employee Grievances Calls for Pragmatic Approach to Desertion and Cruelty in Divorce Cases: Calcutta High Court Orders Fresh Trial Juvenile Tried as Adult: Bombay High Court Validates JJB Decision, Modifies Sentence to 7 Years Retrospective Application of Amended Rules for Redeployment Declared Invalid: Orissa High Court NDPS Act Leaves No Room for Leniency: HC Requires Substantial Proof of Innocence for Bail No Protection Without Performance: MP High Court Denies Relief Under Section 53A of Transfer of Property Act

POCSO | Offences Against Children Are Offences Against Society and Cannot Be Compromised: Supreme Court

09 November 2024 1:53 PM

By: sayum


Supreme Court of India delivered a significant ruling in Ramji Lal Bairwa & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., overturning a Rajasthan High Court order that had quashed an FIR involving child sexual assault based on a compromise between the accused and the victim’s father. The Supreme Court emphasized that cases of child sexual abuse are not “private matters” and thus cannot be dismissed solely on the basis of an out-of-court settlement. This judgment reinforces the intent behind the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, focusing on the grave societal impact of crimes against children.

The case originated from an incident on January 6, 2022, where a high school student in Rajasthan alleged that her teacher sexually assaulted her in an empty classroom, following which he directed casteist abuse at her. Her father, the complainant, filed an FIR against the teacher under the Indian Penal Code, the POCSO Act, and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Subsequently, the accused teacher and the complainant reached an informal settlement, leading to a petition by the accused in the Rajasthan High Court to quash the FIR. Despite opposition from the prosecution, the High Court accepted the petition, citing the amicable resolution and reliance on the Supreme Court’s judgment in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, which allows for quashing of criminal cases in some private disputes.

However, the Supreme Court intervened after two local residents filed an appeal, challenging the High Court’s decision to quash the case.

Locus Standi of Third Parties in Criminal Appeals: The primary legal question was whether third-party individuals, who were not directly involved in the proceedings, could challenge the quashing of the FIR. The Court observed that the appellants, as local residents, acted in public interest given the nature of the offence, which affected societal morals. The Court ruled that the appellants’ standing was valid, relying on precedents in cases where public-spirited citizens have sought justice in cases involving grave offences against the society.

Limits of High Court’s Power to Quash FIR in Serious Offences: The Supreme Court reiterated that the High Court’s authority under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) to quash criminal proceedings should be sparingly exercised in cases involving serious offences like child sexual assault. The judgment cited State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan, asserting that heinous offences impacting society at large cannot be quashed even with a compromise. The Court further highlighted that the POCSO Act mandates stringent protection for children, and dismissing cases based on settlements undermines this legislative intent.

Public Interest and Child Protection: Justice Ravikumar underscored that crimes under the POCSO Act are inherently offences against society, demanding uncompromising prosecution to uphold justice and public safety. The judgment reads, “The act of sexual assault on a child is a crime not merely against the individual but against societal norms and values, which the POCSO Act seeks to protect.”

High Court’s Error in Assessing ‘Private Nature’ of Offence: The Supreme Court criticized the Rajasthan High Court’s decision, noting that it misinterpreted Gian Singh by treating the offence as personal and private. The Court pointed out that cases involving minors and sexual crimes do not qualify for such leniency due to the severe psychological impact on the child and the risk of setting a damaging societal precedent.

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, overturning the High Court’s quashing order. It directed the Rajasthan police to resume the investigation under the POCSO Act and the SC/ST Act, ensuring that legal proceedings continue without interference from informal settlements.

In its concluding remarks, the Court emphasized that the intent of the POCSO Act is to safeguard children from sexual offences and that permitting a compromise in such cases would be contrary to the spirit of justice and deterrence aimed at preventing such heinous acts.

The Supreme Court’s judgment serves as a reminder of the judiciary’s commitment to uphold child protection laws without allowing settlements in cases that deeply impact the social order. The ruling strengthens the message that crimes against children, particularly sexual offences, will be rigorously prosecuted regardless of private settlements between the parties involved.

Date of Decision: November 7, 2024

Ramji Lal Bairwa & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Similar News