Madras High Court Considers Bringing In SOP For Dealing With Children Who Have Undergone Trauma By Witnessing Crimes

The bench of Justice MS Ramesh and Justice N Senthilkumar has asked the Central and the State governments to look into the issue. The State government on Monday informed the court that after the court's previous order, the State was in the process of bringing in an SOP. The counsel, however, sought time to bring the details before the court. The court allowed the request and adjourned the case.

The court was dealing with a criminal appeal in which the man had brutally murdered his sister and mutilated her body. The court noted that the crime was witnessed by the sister's 8-year-old daughter, who saw her own uncle murdering her mother, mutilating her body into several pieces, attempting to hide the body, and cleaning the blood-stained floor. The trial court had convicted the uncle, against which the present appeal was filed.

In the previous hearing, the Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant brought to the court's attention and said that in such cases, the child, who is a victim of trauma, may have a psychological adverse effect on the child's future. He suggested that such children should be given psychological evaluation and counselling by experts, and mechanisms could be formulated for the same by the government.

The court had agreed with the senior advocate's suggestion and noted that it was not an isolated incident. The court noted that there were several cases in which innocent children were victim to several criminal cases. The court noted that while the POCSO Act provides remedial measures for child victims, there were no regulations for child victims in other criminal cases.

“This is not an isolated case of a child being subjected to such trauma by witnessing the commission of a criminal offence. We have been handling several cases frequently, where innocent children are witnesses to several criminal cases. Even in cases where a child witnesses harsh quarrels between his / her parents, etc., it undergoes mental agony. While the POCSO Act envisages safeguards and remedial measures for child victims, there are no regulations for child victims in other criminal cases to extend psychological evaluation or counselling,” the court had noted.

The court noted that even as per the Directive Principles of State Policy, the State was duty bound to ensure that children are given opportunities to develop in a healthy manner in conditions of freedom and dignity. Sadly, the court noted that there were no policies or programmes or regulations to assure the same and even the National Policy for Children 2013 was not being implemented.

Thus, using its inherent powers, the court impleaded the Ministry of Women and Children Development, Principal Secretary (Home Department) TN, Principal Secretary (Dept of Social Welfare and Women Empowerment) TN, Director General of Police TN, Director, and the Head of Department of Psychiatry, Institute of Mental Health Chennai.

When the matter was taken up today, the State informed that it was considering bring in SOP for the same. The state informed the court that such children could be covered under the definition of child in need of care and protection under Section 2(14) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015. The state however, sought time to bring in more clarity.

The court also asked Senior Counsel Abdu Kumar Rajarathinam if he could identify categories of children who would need such care and protection.

Counsel for Appellants: Mr. Abdu Kumar Rajarathnam, senior counsel for Ms. Vijayalakshmi

Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. J. Ravindran, Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr. A. Gokulakrishnan, Additonal Public Prosecutor

Case Title: Saravanakumar v. The State

Case No: CRL A NO. 25 of 2023 and Crl.M.P.No.268 of 2023