POCSO Probes Must Be Child-Friendly; Sensitise Investigators To Ensure 'Truth Emerges Without Ambiguity': Gauhati High Court
The Gauhati High Court has stressed that investigations under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act must be conducted with sensitivity and strict adherence to child-friendly procedures, observing that failure to provide counselling support, appoint support persons and record clear, specific statements may defeat the very cause of justice. The Court cautioned that...
The Gauhati High Court has stressed that investigations under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act must be conducted with sensitivity and strict adherence to child-friendly procedures, observing that failure to provide counselling support, appoint support persons and record clear, specific statements may defeat the very cause of justice. The Court cautioned that defective or casual investigations not only prejudice the accused but may also result in acquittals even where an offence might have occurred.
A Division Bench of Justice Michael Zothankhuma and Justice Kaushik Goswami made these observations while setting aside the conviction of a man who had been sentenced to 20 years' rigorous imprisonment for aggravated penetrative sexual assault under Section 6 of the POCSO Act read with Section 376(3) IPC. Holding that the prosecution failed to establish the foundational ingredients of penetrative sexual assault beyond reasonable doubt, the Court acquitted the appellant and ordered his release.
The case arose from allegations that the accused had lured his minor cousin to his house near a pond and committed sexual assault on multiple occasions. The trial court had relied primarily on the testimony of the prosecutrix along with the statements of her parents and school records to prove minority, and convicted the accused.
However, upon reappreciating the evidence, the High Court found serious inconsistencies and omissions in the prosecution's case. The Bench noted that in her earliest statement before the police, the child had only alleged that the accused committed a “bad act”. Even in her statement under Section 164 CrPC before the Magistrate, she did not disclose any act of sexual penetration and merely referred to inappropriate conduct and holding of her hand. It was only during trial that she described repeated penetrative intercourse, bleeding and pain.
The Court held that such improvements on the core ingredient of penetration were material and went to the root of the prosecution case. It observed that while conviction can rest on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix, the evidence must be consistent, natural and of sterling quality. Testimony suffering from substantial improvements and contradictions cannot be accepted without caution.
Medical evidence also failed to support the allegation of rape. The examining doctor found the hymen intact and noted no injuries or signs of recent sexual intercourse. The Court observed that although medical corroboration is not always decisive, its absence assumes significance when the ocular testimony itself appears doubtful.
The Bench further found that the parents' evidence did not inspire confidence. The father's claim that he saw the accused adjusting his pants and the victim scratching her thigh was not stated during investigation and appeared to be an improvement at trial. The mother's version regarding threats also differed from the child's account. These inconsistencies weakened the prosecution's attempt at corroboration.
The surrounding circumstances also appeared improbable. Houses were located within close proximity to the alleged place of occurrence, yet no neighbour reported hearing any alarm. Despite alleging earlier assaults, the child followed the accused alone to his house. The Investigating Officer also failed to clarify what exactly the child meant by the expression “bad act”, leaving the foundational allegation vague.
Taking note of these deficiencies, the Court expressed dissatisfaction with the quality of investigation. It recorded that there was nothing to show that the child was provided psychological counselling or emotional support to help her narrate the incident comfortably. No support person was appointed during the investigation or trial, as envisaged under the POCSO framework. The Bench observed that such safeguards are integral to the Act's objective of enabling children to depose freely and accurately.
Emphasising the importance of proper procedure, the Court observed that investigating agencies must be sensitised and trained to adopt child-friendly methods, ensure counselling assistance where necessary, appoint support persons and record clear, specific statements so that the truth emerges without ambiguity. A defective investigation, it warned, risks failure of justice for both victims and accused.
Reiterating that suspicion, however strong, cannot substitute proof and that benefit of doubt must go to the accused, the Court concluded that the prosecution had failed to establish the charge beyond reasonable doubt. The conviction and sentence were accordingly set aside, and the appellant was acquitted of all charges.
Case Title: Md. Shah Alam v. State of Assam & Anr.
LL Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Gau) 24
Case No.: Criminal Appeal (J) No. 87 of 2024