“Merely because a crime is heinous per se may not be a sufficient reason for the imposition of the death penalty without considering the mitigating factors and other circumstance”
Section 112 of the Evidence Act underscores the principle that children born within the confines of a legally recognized marriage are deemed legitimate per se and it ensures that no unwarranted assumptions of impropriety or moral transgressions are made and instead places the burden of proof on those who contest the child’s legitimacy.
The High Court also issued directions for effective implementation of POCSO Act and amendments introduced in the CrPC in 2018 vis-à-vis notifying the informants or victims about filing of regular and anticipatory bail applications and other connected issues.
On determination of age, Bombay High Court expressed that “When there is still margin of four years, it cannot be said that the girl was not a “child” as defined under Section 2(d) of the POCSO Act.”
The courts should strive to strike a balance between the rights of accused and the practicalities of the legal process. In cases, if the trial can proceed effectively with the accused remaining present before the court through alternative means, the court should be flexible in considering prayers made to this effect by the accused.
“In cases involving child witnesses, the Court should consider the child’s age, competency, and demeanor and may uphold a conviction even in the absence of other corroborating witnesses if the victim’s testimony is deemed reliable.”
“The counsel for the respondent was directed to take all necessary measures to protect the identity and right to privacy of the girl child and that the media acts in compliance with Section 23 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.”
“While balancing the right of the accused to a fair trial and upholding the intent of the legislation, the courts are duty bound to remain sensitive to the plight of the seven-year-old sexual assault victim.”
“When a minor seeks a medical termination of pregnancy, doctors must ensure that the process is conducted in compliance with the prevailing laws and regulations, with utmost sensitivity to the minor’s age and maturity level.”
Bombay High Court observed that the appellant was aged 46 when the offence was committed and it has come in the evidence that he was residing with his wife and children. Still, he has ravished a small child aged six years and, therefore, no leniency can be shown against him.
In the case of sexual assault, denying a woman right to say no to medical termination of pregnancy and fasten her with responsibility of motherhood would amount to denying her human right to live with dignity as she has a right in relation to her body which includes saying Yes or No to being a mother.
Kerala High Court expressed that ‘same transaction’ is the essence being vital for deciding whether series of acts in question are connected for a common trial.
The Court observed that the prosecution evidence on being scrutinised should inspire the confidence of the Court regarding the factum of sexual intent being involved in the case in hand.
In a case of consensual adolescent mutual love, there will be no place of abusing, blackmailing, inducement, threat, violence, pressurizing and threatening the prosecutrix to convert her religion for forcibly getting married even when she wanted to get out of the abusive relationship.
Delhi High Court observed that the child who was being examined in the case at hand was in the category of a child witness who is vulnerable and a victim of sexual assault by her own father, and it was not a new phenomenon in criminal jurisprudence.
by Tanya Agarwal†
The Delhi High Court opined that the woman’s consent was implied and express and not coerced by deceit as she maintained the physical relationship with the man for 12 years and thus, the Court upheld Trial Court’s Order of discharging a man who was accused of raping her.
The legislation in its own wisdom have planned to use the state machinery to investigate into all those offences, in which the women are poor victims of the atrocities committed by male.
The Bombay High Court came down heavily on the law firm for revealing the identity of a rape victim. The Court, while allowing the firm’s application to mask the name of the victim imposed a cost of Rs. 5,000 on it.
Gujarat High Court denied showing any leniency while deciding bail application of accused charged with offences under POCSO Act.