POCSO Act: All India Annual Digest 2025

Supreme Court

Application in Consensual Adolescent Relationships - The Supreme Court emphasized a nuanced application of the POCSO Act in cases involving consensual romantic relationships between adolescents, prioritizing the best interests of the victim and her dependents. (Paras 15, 31) In Re: Right to Privacy of Adolescents, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 617 : 2025 INSC 778

Life Imprisonment - While conviction under both IPC and POCSO Act may be justified, the High Court erred in enhancing the life imprisonment awarded by the trial court to "imprisonment for the remainder of natural life" in an appeal against conviction. Courts have discretion to award life imprisonment under Section 376(2)(f) and 376(2)(i) of the IPC, but it is not mandatory that it extend to the remainder of the convict's natural life. In cases where life imprisonment is deemed appropriate but a fixed term is considered insufficient, courts may impose a modified sentence specifying a fixed period beyond 14 years. In this case the sentence of life imprisonment awarded by the trial court was reinstated, but without the addition that it will enure till the natural life of the appellant, along with a fine of 5,00,000/- to be paid to the victim. (Para 28 & 31) Gyanendra Singh @ Raja Singh v. State of U.P., 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 299 : 2025 INSC 335 : AIR 2025 SC 1972

Proof of Minority – Held, the victim's 8th standard marksheet, showing her date of birth, corroborated by testimony of her parents, was cogent and reliable evidence to establish her minority at the time of the incident, thereby attracting the provisions of the POCSO Act - Supreme Court focused on need of a sensitive approach in dealing with sexual assault charges, noting that an unmerited acquittal encourages offenders and that rape causes severe psychological and physical harm. [Para 5] Deepak Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 776 : 2025 INSC 929

Quashing of Conviction and Sentence - Article 142 of the Constitution of India – Held, quashing of conviction under Section 366 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act using Article 142 power of "complete justice" where the appellant and victim married and have a child - Supreme Court invoked its extraordinary power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to quash the criminal proceedings, including the conviction and sentence, against the appellant for offences under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code, 1872 and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 - Supreme Court acknowledged that while the law provides that proceedings for a heinous offense cannot be quashed on the basis of a compromise, ignoring the wife's cry for compassion and empathy would not serve the ends of justice - This is a case where the law must yield to the cause of justice - The appellant was subjected to the specific condition of not deserting his wife and child and to maintain them for the rest of their life with dignity - Appeal allowed. [Paras 8 - 13] K. Kirubakaran v. State of Tamil Nadu, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1048 : 2025 INSC 1272

Real-Time Data Collection - The Court supported proposals for a structured mechanism to track POCSO cases, sex education implementation, counseling services, and child marriage monitoring to enhance institutional accountability and transparency. A notice was issued to the Union of India to form a committee to address these suggestions. States and Union Territories were directed to ensure compliance with POCSO and Juvenile Justice Act provisions, with compliance reports to be submitted to the Ministry of Women and Child Development. (Paras 15, 31) In Re: Right to Privacy of Adolescents, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 617 : 2025 INSC 778

Section 4, 6 - Misjoinder of charges/trial - Acquittal by High Court on Procedural grounds - Reinstatement of Trial Court's conviction - Held, High Court erred in its reasoning, acknowledging that there were minor variations in the evidence, Supreme Court found these natural and inconsequential, especially given in the socio-economic circumstances of the victim from a rural region - The victim's testimony was consistent across police and magisterial statements and during the trial - The evidence presented, including School TC and medical reports, conclusively proved the victim was a minor (aged 12-13 at the time of incident) and pregnant - Mere irregularities in the framing of charges or the conduct of a joint trial do not automatically invalidate the proceedings - Defective charge regarding the date of the offence did not mislead the accused, as the time frame was well-known to them throughout the trial - Joint trial, even if considered a procedural irregularity under Section 223 CrPC, did not cause any prejudice to the accused or result in a failure of justice - The principle of 'beyond reasonable doubt' should not be misapplied to allow culprits to walk free based on minor inconsistencies - A reasonable doubt must be serious and backed by reason, making the prosecution's version improbable - High Court's acquittal was a 'misapplication of procedure' - Appeal allowed. [Paras 26-33, 35-38] Sushil Kumar Tiwari v. Hare Ram Sah, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 864 : 2025 INSC 1061

Section 6 - Conviction and Sentence - Judicial Caution against Re-Traumatization – Held, appellant was convicted and sentenced to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment read with Section 12 of the POCSO Act - The prosecutrix's statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) to be detailed, coherent, and free from exaggeration or inconsistency - Her testimony was reiterated before the Trial Court and corroborated by contemporaneous medical evidence, which confirmed signs of recent forcible sexual intercourse - The victim's age was established through her birth certificate, placing her unambiguously below 12 years at the time of the incident - Courts must remain vigilant against procedural submissions being used as harassment tactics, particularly in cases involving child sexual abuse - Reiterated that requests to recall a child victim after trial conclusion and concurrent findings of guilt raise serious concerns about secondary victimization - Such attempts must be discouraged to protect the integrity of the victim's testimony and public confidence in justice delivery - the Supreme Court expressed anguish that no compensation had been awarded to the victim by either the Trial Court or the High Court - In exercise of its constitutional duty to provide meaningful redress Supreme Court directed the State of Arunachal Pradesh to pay Rs. 10,50,000 as compensation. [Paras 7-12] Arjun Sonar v. State of Arunachal Pradesh, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 935

Section 6 – Held, merely touching the private parts of a minor girl will not constitute the offence of rape under Section 375, 376 AB of IPC or penetrative sexual assault under Section 6 of the POCSO Act - Such conduct would instead amount to offence of 'aggravated sexual assault' as defined under Section 9(m) of the POCSO Act as well as the offence of 'outraging the modesty of a woman' under Section 354 IPC - Appeal allowed. [Paras 7 - 10] Laxman Jangde v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 928

Section 6 – Held, retrospective application of enhanced punishment violates Article 20(1) - Amended provision of Section 6 of POCSO Act, which came into effect on August 16, 2019, could not be applied to the appellant's case since the offence was committed on May 20, 2019 - Retrospective imposition of a harsher penalty is barred by Article 20 (1) of the Constitution of India, which states that no person shall be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence - Sentence of “imprisonment for life, meaning remainder of natural life” did not exist on the date of the incident under the unamended Section 6 - Maximum punishment then permissible was imprisonment for life in its conventional sense - Supreme Court upheld the conviction of appellant under section 6 of POCSO Act, and modified the sentence to rigorous imprisonment for life as understood under unamended statute, and set aside the sentence of imprisonment for the remainder of natural life - Appeal partly allowed. [Paras 9-12] Satauram Mandavi v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 744 : 2025 INSC 892

Section 6 - Indian Penal Code, 1860; Sections 376(3), 376(2)(n) - Victim, now married to the accused and living with him and their child, did not perceive the incident as a crime. The victim's trauma resulted more from the legal process, societal judgment, and family abandonment than the incident itself. A committee report confirmed that the legal and social consequences caused greater harm than the act. The Court criticized deficiencies in the legal system and societal attitudes, acknowledging the victim's emotional attachment to the accused and her desire to protect her family. Previously, the Court had set aside controversial High Court remarks on adolescent sexuality, restored the conviction, and issued guidelines on judgment writing and compliance with the POCSO Act and Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The Court directed the government to provide educational and financial support to the victim and her child, with assistance from the State Legal Services Authority. Invoking Article 142, the Court refrained from sentencing the accused due to the unique circumstances, as the victim opposed punishment to preserve her family. (Paras 23, 24) In Re: Right to Privacy of Adolescents, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 617 : 2025 INSC 778

Section 6 r/w 5(m), 8 r/w 7 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 207, 366 - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 27- Constitutional Right to Fair Trial & Legal Aid - Violation of Articles 21 & 22(1) - CrPC Section 207 – Held that the trial was vitiated due to a denial of effective opportunity for defence - The mandatory requirement of providing copies of relied-upon documents under Section 207 CrPC was not complied with before charges were framed - The legal aid counsel was appointed only four days before the commencement of the prosecution evidence, giving insufficient time to prepare the matter and conduct effective cross-examination. [Relied on Anokhilal v. State of Madhya Pradesh 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1637; Para 35, 38] Dashwanth v. State of Tamil Nadu, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 983 : 2025 INSC 1203

Sections 6, 29 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Section 506 - Aggravated penetrative sexual assault - Presumption of Guilt - Criminal Intimidation – Held, incestuous sexual violence committed by parent requires severest punishment, upheld fathers POCSO conviction - Crimes of sexual abuse, especially against children and by a parent, constitute an unspeakable betrayal of trust and assume a “demonic character”, deserving the “severest condemnation and deterrent punishment” - Incestuous sexual violence by a parent is a distinct category of offence that tears through the foundational fabric of familial trust and must invite the severest condemnation in both language and sentence, with no mitigation in sentencing for such crimes - A father who is expected to be a shield, a guardian, a moral compass, becomes the source of the most severe violation of a child's bodily integrity and dignity, the betrayal is not only personal but institutional - The home, which should be a sanctuary, cannot be permitted to become a site of unspeakable trauma, and the courts must send a clear signal that such offences will be met with an equally unsparing judicial response - Directed Rs. 10,50,000/- to be paid as compensation to the victim by State. [Paras 9-16] Bhanei Prasad @ Raju v. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 781 : 2025 INSC 934

Section 7 - Sexual Harassment of Students - Quashing of FIR - High Court's Insensitive Approach - Restoration of Criminal Proceedings - The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order quashing an FIR against a computer teacher accused of sexually harassing students, predominantly female, in a government-aided school. The Court criticized the High Court for conducting a "mini-trial" and erroneously concluding that the accused's actions lacked sexual intent under Section 7 of the POCSO Act. The allegations, including inappropriate physical contact, invasive questions, and sending vulgar images, prima facie constituted offenses under the POCSO Act, necessitating a trial. The Court noted the High Court's insensitive approach, particularly as many victims belonged to minority communities, and directed the trial court to proceed expeditiously, treating victims as protected witnesses. The accused was ordered to remain suspended during the trial and prohibited from contacting victims or witnesses. The High Court's interpretation that Section 7 requires physical contact with sexual intent was incorrect, as the teacher's actions, given their position of authority, provided sufficient grounds to infer sexual intent. The Court expressed concern over the accused's influence, including a purported settlement with one victim and the police's initial failure to record all victims' statements. The school was directed to maintain the accused's suspension and permitted to conduct an independent domestic inquiry. (Paras 2, 3, 4) X v. Rajesh Kumar, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 498 : 2025 INSC 579

Section 8 - Penal Code, Section 363, 376(2), 302 - Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 3 - Rape and Murder of a Three-Year-Old Girl - The prosecution's case, relying on an alleged extra-judicial confession and last seen evidence, was found deficient. The extra-judicial confession, based on the accused's statement of being “tensed up,” lacked corroboration and was omitted from the witness's Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement, rendering it unreliable. Witness testimonies on last seen circumstances were inconsistent, delayed, and tainted by ulterior motives and trial-stage improvements. Gross negligence by Investigating Officers, including delayed recording of witness statements despite early identification in the spot panchnama and withholding of critical FSL reports comparing samples from other suspects, warranted an adverse inference. The prosecution's evidence, based on conjectures, failed to meet the burden of proof. Emphasizing the weak nature of extra-judicial confessions and the need for robust investigations in heinous crimes, the Court set aside the conviction, acquitting the accused after nearly 12 years of incarceration, including 6 years under a death sentence. (Paras 59, 60, 75 & 76) Ramkirat Munilal Goud v. State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 596 : AIR 2025 SC 3186 : 2025 Cri.L.J. 3027 : 2025 INSC 702

Sections 9(m) and 10 - Aggravated Sexual Assault - The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of a man found guilty of aggravated sexual assault on a 4-year-old girl, rejecting his plea for acquittal based on the absence of medical evidence and eyewitness testimony, holding that the consistent and credible evidence of the child's parents was sufficient to sustain the conviction - The Supreme Court reiterated the well-settled principle that medical evidence will take a backseat and even if it does not corroborate with the ocular evidence, the latter would be allowed to prevail where it is consistent and cogent- Appeal partly allowed. [Paras 5 - 9] Dinesh Kumar Jaldhari v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1105 : 2025 INSC 1317

Section 42A - No plea for a lesser punishment under the POCSO Act can be entertained if the IPC prescribes a higher punishment for certain offences by arguing that Section 42A, as a special law, overrides the IPC, which is considered a general law. (Para 22) Sentencing – Enhancement of - High Court erred in enhancing sentence in absence of appeal for enhancement by state The High Court had clarified that the life imprisonment awarded by the trial court would mean imprisonment for the remainder of the appellant's natural life. While the trial court had the discretion to award life imprisonment, the High Court could not enhance the sentence in an appeal filed by the accused, especially without an appeal for enhancement by the State. (Para 27) Gyanendra Singh @ Raja Singh v. State of U.P., 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 299 : 2025 INSC 335 : AIR 2025 SC 1972

Section 42A - Overriding effect - Section 42A of the POCSO Act, which gives overriding effect to the POCSO Act in cases of inconsistency with other laws, pertains to procedural aspects and does not override the substantive provision of Section 42 regarding punishment. (Para 22) Gyanendra Singh @ Raja Singh v. State of U.P., 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 299 : 2025 INSC 335 : AIR 2025 SC 1972

Section 42 - Sentencing - Overlapping Offences - Where acts constitute offences under both the POCSO Act and the IPC, the law providing for the greater degree of punishment applies. (Para 19 & 21) Gyanendra Singh @ Raja Singh v. State of U.P., 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 299 : 2025 INSC 335 : AIR 2025 SC 1972

Sex Education Reforms - The Court endorsed amici curiae suggestions for comprehensive sexuality education to address adolescent health, misinformation, and stigma, referencing UNESCO's 2021 Global Status Report on the need for systematic policy reforms and inclusive curricula. The Union Ministry of Women and Child Development was directed to constitute an expert committee to evaluate these suggestions, with a report due by 25 July 2025. (Paras 15, 31) In Re: Right to Privacy of Adolescents, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 617 : 2025 INSC 778

The Supreme Court directed the Union and State Governments to prioritize establishing Special POCSO Courts and ensure compliance with statutory timelines for investigation and trial. The Court emphasized sensitizing officials involved in POCSO cases and mandated timely filing of chargesheets and completion of trials as per the Act. While acknowledging compliance by several States with Central Government funding, the Court noted deficiencies in Tamil Nadu, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Odisha, and Maharashtra, where high case pendency necessitates additional POCSO Courts. Previous orders from July 2019 mandated exclusive POCSO Courts in districts with over 100 pending cases, appointment of Special Public Prosecutors, and adherence to investigation and trial timelines. The Court also proposed exploring a National Scheme for victim compensation under the POCSO Act. (Para 6) In Re Alarming Rise in the Number of Reported Child Rape Incidents, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 581 : 2025 INSC 695

Allahabad High Court

Rape Survivor Faces Dual Crises, Crime Wounds Her Dignity & Trial Forces Her To Relive Traumatic Experience: Allahabad HC

Case title - Arvind vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 5

Case citation : 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 5

The Allahabad High Court has observed that a woman who is raped undergoes two crises- the commission of a crime, where her dignity is wounded and her sense of security is destroyed and the subsequent trial, where she is forced to relive the traumatic experience.

“It is often stated that a woman who is raped undergoes two crises- the rape and the subsequent trial. While the first seriously wounds her dignity, curbs her individual, destroys her sense of security and may often ruin her physically, the second is no less potent of mischief inasmuch as it not only force her to relive through the traumatic experience, but also does so in the glare of publicity in a totally alien atmosphere, with the whole apparatus and paraphernalia of the criminal justice system focused upon her,” a bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh observed in an order passed on Tuesday denying bail to a man accused of raping a minor girl.

'Violation Of Familial Trust': Allahabad HC Denies Bail To POCSO Accused For 'Illicit' Relation With Minor Sister-In-Law

Case title - Devideen vs. State Of Up And 3 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 40

Case citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 40

The Allahabad High Court recently denied bail to a man booked under the POCSO Act, Indian Penal Code and Dowry Prohibition Act on the allegations of harassing his wife (complainant/informant) for dowry as well as for enticing away her minor sister and subjecting her to aggravated penetrative sexual assault.

A bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh remarked that the accused's alleged conduct is not only a breach of the sacred bond of marriage but also an egregious violation of familial trust and moral integrity.

A Minor Rape Survivor In Our Country Would Rather Suffer Silently Than Falsely Implicate Someone: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Suraj Kumar Alias Vishwapratap Singh vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 54

Case citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 54

Denying bail to a man accused of raping a minor girl, the Allahabad High Court has recently observed that in our country, a minor girl, who is a victim of sexual aggression, would rather suffer silently than implicate somebody falsely.

A bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh said that the Court must keep in mind while appreciating the evidence of the prosecutrix the values prevailing in the country, particularly in rural India, where it would be unusual for a girl to come up with a false story of being a victim of sexual assault to implicate an innocent person.

Grabbing Breasts, Breaking Minor Victim's Pyjama String Not Attempt To Rape But Prima Facie 'Aggravated Sexual Assault': Allahabad HC

Case title - Akash And 2 Others vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 95

Case citation : 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 95

Observing that grabbing the breasts of the victim, breaking the string of her pyjama and trying to drag her beneath the culvert before fleeing the spot won't come under the offence of rape or an attempt to rape, the Allahabad High Court modified a summoning order, altering the charges against two accused.

Initially summoned to face trial under Section 376 IPC (Rape) and Section 18 of the POCSO Act, the High Court instead directed that the accused be tried under the minor charge of Section 354-B IPC (assault or use of criminal force with intent to disrobe) read with Sections 9/10 of the POCSO Act (aggravated sexual assault).

'DOB Being Manipulated To Seek Juvenile Status': Allahabad HC Calls For Strict Age Verification In Criminal Cases As Per S. 94 JJ Act

Case title - Amarjeet Pandey vs. State Of Up And 3 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 139

Case citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 139

In an order, the Allahabad High Court raised serious concerns over the growing trend of litigants manipulating their date of birth in criminal proceedings to obtain 'favourable' legal outcomes, such as being declared a juvenile.

In a strongly worded order, the Court also criticised the laxity of law enforcement agencies in conducting proper age verification as required by Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

POCSO Act Not Meant To Criminalise Consensual Romantic Relations: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Raj Sonkar vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 165

Case citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 165

The Allahabad High Court has observed that the POCSO Act, which was enacted to protect children under the age of 18 years from sexual exploitation, has now become a tool for their exploitation.

Stressing that the Act was never meant to criminalise consensual romantic relationships between adolescents, a bench of Justice Krishan Pahal said that the fact of a consensual relationship borne out of love should be considered while granting bail.

'Very Disturbing': Allahabad HC On 'Minor' Spending A Year In Regular Jail As Trial Court Failed To Decide Juvenility Plea

Case title - Arjun @ Golu vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Govt. Of U.P. Lko. And 3 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 184

Case citation : 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 184

The Allahabad High Court expressed its concern over a 16-year-old minor languishing in a regular jail alongside undertrial accused persons and convicts, due to the trial court's failure to decide his application claiming juvenility.

A bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi observed that if the trial court ultimately concludes that the applicant is a juvenile in conflict with law, the loss caused to him, having spent over a year in regular jail with undertrial prisoners and convicts, cannot be remedied by any means.

'Criminality Stood Washed Off': Allahabad HC Grants Bail To POCSO Convict Noting Marriage With Prosecutrix, Birth Of Child

Case title - Mayank Alias Ramsharan vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Case citation : 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 233

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to a man convicted under the POCSO Act, noting that he had married the prosecutrix and the couple were living together as husband and wife, with a child born out of their wedlock.

Though observing that the convict's act was "not only illegal but also immoral", a bench of Justice Rajeev Misra opined that the "criminality, if any, committed by applicant/appellant stood washed off" given the subsequent developments, including the marriage between the parties and the birth of their son.

Adolescents Losing Innocence Due To TV, Internet & Social Media; Govt Helpless As Nature Of Technology Is Uncontrollable: Allahabad HC

Case title - Juvenile X vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 266

Case citation : 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 266

The Allahabad High Court expressed its serious concerns over the 'disastrous' effects of television, internet, and social media on adolescents, observing that these mediums are causing a "loss of their innocence at a very early and tender age", and that even the government can't control their influence due to the 'uncontrollable' nature of the technologies involved.

A bench of Justice Siddharth made these observations while allowing a criminal revision filed by a juvenile challenging an order of the Juvenile Justice Board as well as the POCSO Court, Kaushambi, that he be tried as an adult in an alleged case of consensual physical relationship with a minor girl.

Mere Talking Terms With Victim Can't Be Treated As 'Enticing Her Away' U/S 361 IPC: Allahabad High Court Quashes Kidnapping Case

Case title - Himanshu Dubey vs. State of U.P. and Another 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 345

Case citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 344

The Allahabad High Court quashed criminal proceedings against a man booked under Section 363 IPC [Punishment for kidnapping], holding that merely being in talking terms with a minor girl cannot by itself be treated as 'enticing her away from lawful guardianship'.

A bench of Justice Vikram D Chauhan observed that where the minor, voluntarily and on her own accord, leaves the lawful guardianship, then in such circumstances the applicability of Section 361 IPC [Kidnapping from lawful guardianship] does not arise.

Cohabitation With Adult Husband To Invite POCSO: Allahabad High Court Directs Minor Mother To Stay In Shelter Home Till She Turns 18

Case title - X and another vs. State of U.P. and others

Case citation : 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 403

The Allahabad High Court recently declined to release a 17-year-old girl, who is both a minor and a mother of two-month-old child, from a government shelter home as it said that she must remain there until she attains majority on October 5, 2026.

A Bench of Justice JJ Munir and Justice Sanjiv Kumar passed the order on a habeas plea filed on behalf of the minor girl and her child as it refused to allow her to live with adult husband. The Court observed thus:

"Permitting a minor to cohabit with an adult would make the husband liable for offences punishable under the POCSO Act as well".

JJ Act | Child Alleged To Be In Conflict With Law Can't Be Lodged In Jail Even During Inquiry To Determine His Age: Allahabad High Court

Case Title: Pawan Kumar (Corpus) And Another v. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 4 Others [HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 497 of 2025]

Case citation : 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 416

The Allahabad High Court has held that under the Juvenile Justice Act 2015 a person accused who claims to be child at time of commission of offence, cannot be sent to jail or police lockup even during an inquiry regarding determination of his age either by a Court or the Juvenile Justice Board

In doing so the court held that a child in conflict with law or alleged to be in conflict with law cannot be lodged in jail till they attain 21 years of age.

JJ Act | Child Welfare Committee Has No Power To Direct Police To Register FIR; Can Only Report Violations: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Rishi Pal And Another vs. State of U.P. and Another

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 427

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that a Child Welfare Committee (CWC) constituted under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 has no power to direct the police to register a First Information Report (FIR).

The bench added that the CWC can only forward a report to the Juvenile Justice Board or to the concerned police authority if it finds a violation of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.

JJ Act | Juvenile's Conviction Not To Be Treated As Disqualification For Appointment In Services: Allahabad High Court

Case Title: Pundarikaksh Dev Pathak Versus Union of India and 3 others [WRIT - A No. - 9462 of 2025]

Case citation : 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 429

Placing reliance on erstwhile Section 19 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 which is almost identical to Section 24 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, the Allahabad High Court has held that juvenile's conviction under the Act is not to be treated as disqualification for appointment in services.

Section 19 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 provides that notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, a juvenile who has committed an offence and has been dealt with under the provisions of this Act shall not suffer disqualification, if any, attaching to a conviction of an offence under such law.

'Criminality Now Stands Washed Off': Allahabad High Court Quashes 2016 POCSO Act Case Noting Accused Married Victim 'Long Way Back'

Case title - Wasiullah And 2 Others vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 479

The Allahabad High Court quashed criminal proceedings of a rape case lodged under the POCSO Act and the Indian Penal Code in 2016, noting that the accused had married the prosecutrix 'a long way back'.

Observing that the couple is living a happy married life with a child, a bench of Justice Vivek Kumar Singh said that "criminality, if any...now stands washed off” and that the chances of conviction of the applicant is now "not only remote but also bleak".

Compelling Wife To Undergo Trial For Inevitable Acquittal Is 'Instrument Of Harassment': Allahabad High Court Quashes POCSO Case Against Husband

Case title - Ashwani Anand vs State of U.P. and 3 others

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 492

The Allahabad High Court quashed criminal proceedings under the POCSO Act against a man who married the alleged victim, who also favoured quashing. as it observed that forcing a happily married couple to face trial merely to record a hostile testimony would be an "irony of fate" and an "instrument of harassment”.

A bench of Justice Kshitij Shailendra thus allowed the plea of one Ashwani Anand observing that it cannot remain a "silent spectator" or "mere bystander" when the ends of justice demand immediate intervention.

Bombay High Court

Following A Girl Only Once Will Not Amount To Stalking: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Amit Chavan vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 4

In a significant order, the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court recently held that merely following a girl or a victim once, will not amount to stalking as prescribed under the 354-D of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the provisions under the Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

Bombay HC Grants Bail In POCSO Case, Says 25-Yr Old Accused Was Not A 'Predator' But A “Young Person” In Consensual Relationship With 16-Yr-Old

Case Title: Mohammed Ajaan Khan vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 63

The Bombay High Court on Thursday (February 13) while granting bail to a 25-year-old man booked for raping a minor girl of 16 years for 15 months and impregnating her twice, said that he was not a 'sexual predator' but a young person, who was involved in a consensual relationship with the girl.

14 Y/O Girl Had 'Sufficient Knowledge & Capacity' To Understand Her Actions: Bombay HC Grants Bail To POCSO Accused

Case Title: Vijay Chand Dubey vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 69

The Bombay High Court on Monday granted bail to a 24-year-old man booked for raping a 14-year-old minor girl, noting that the victim had 'sufficient knowledge' and 'capacity' to know the 'full import of her actions' as she 'voluntarily' stayed with the accused for 4 days. Single-judge Justice Milind Jadhav noted that multiple decisions of the Supreme Court and various other Courts have favoured the release of young offenders on bail pending trial so that the regressive influences of the jail environment can be avoided and keeping in mind the principle of best interest in the circumstances of a particular case.

Granting Bail In Serious Offences Under POCSO Act Defeats Statute: Bombay High Court Denies Bail To Man Booked For Sodomising Minor Boy

Case Title: Mayur Raju Waghmare vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025, LiveLaw (Bom) 256

The Bombay High Court recently held that in serious cases covered under special statute like the Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO), courts should not have a 'liberal' approach and grant bail to an accused. Single-judge Justice Amit Borkar observed that though every accused has a fundamental right to liberty but the same cannot be said to be an 'absolute right.'

POCSO FIR Can't Be Quashed Only Because Victim And Accused Have Married And A Child Is Born: Bombay High Court

Case Title: MABRB vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 391

Just because a minor girl has fallen in love with an adult man and their families have got them married and she has given birth to a child does not mean that the offences under the Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act are not made out, the Bombay High Court held on Friday (September 26). A division bench of Justices Urmila Joshi-Phalke and Nandesh Deshpande refused to quash an FIR lodged against 29-year-old man and his parents, booked under the charges of the stringent POCSO Act and also the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act.

Granting Bail In Serious Offences Under POCSO Act Defeats Statute: Bombay High Court Denies Bail To Man Booked For Sodomising Minor Boy

Case Title: Mayur Raju Waghmare vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025, LiveLaw (Bom) 256

The Bombay High Court recently held that in serious cases covered under special statute like the Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO), courts should not have a 'liberal' approach and grant bail to an accused. Single-judge Justice Amit Borkar observed that though every accused has a fundamental right to liberty but the same cannot be said to be an 'absolute right.'

Catching Hold Of Child's Hand & Offering Money For Sexual Favours Amounts To 'Sexual Assault' Under POCSO Act : Bombay High Court

Case Title: Sheikh Rafique Sk. Gulab vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 548

The Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) has held that the act of catching hold of a minor girl's hand, when accompanied by an offer of money in exchange of sexual favours, squarely falls within the definition of 'Sexual Assault' under Section 7 POCSO Act which is punishable under Section 8.

Calcutta High Court

[POCSO Act] Trying To Grope Victim's Breast Doesn't Fall Under Definition Of Attempted Rape: Calcutta High Court

Case: Zomangaih @ Zohmangaiha -Vs.- State of West Bengal

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 94

The Calcutta High Court has held that the attempt of a man to grope a minor girl's breast in an inebriated state, did not tantamount to the offence of attempted rape under the POCSO act, but could be categorised as attempt to commit aggravated sexual assault due to there being no penetrative act.

[S.483(2) BNSS] Calcutta High Court Suspends Bail Granted To POCSO Accused By Trial Court Without Hearing Victim

Case: In Re : XXX

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 220

The Calcutta High Court has suspended the bail granted to a man accused under the POCSO Act, by the trial court, after finding that the bail had been granted without hearing the victim in the case.

Minor Cannot Consent To Sexual Relations Even If In Love Relationship: Calcutta High Court Upholds Life Sentence In POCSO Case

Case: Santosh Srivastava @ Manu Srivastava v. State of West Bengal & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 281

The Calcutta High Court has upheld the life imprisonment of a man convicted of repeatedly sexually assaulting a girl aged between 12 and 14 years.

The Court held that the victim's affection or “love affair” with the accused could not dilute the statutory protection granted to children or legitimise sexual acts committed against her.

Chhattisgarh High Court

Chhattisgarh HC Reduces Man's Sentence U/S 377 IPC For Sodomising Friend After Watching Porn, Says He Deserves Some Reprieve

Case Title: X v. State of Chhattisgarh

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Chh) 31

The Chhattisgarh High Court has recently reduced the sentence of a man convicted for having unnatural/anal sexual intercourse with a friend after watching certain pornographic contents on his mobile phone.

Justice Rajani Dubey, though maintained the conviction under Section 377 (Unnatural offences) IPC, was of the view that the accused-appellant deserves some reprieve, especially considering his incarceration for the last five years. The Bench observed –

“Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, overall evidence adduced by the prosecution, the mode and manner in which the incident had taken place, in my view, some reprieve in the matter of sentence deserves to be given to him.”

The court however set aside the man's conviction under Section 4 (Punishment for penetrative sexual assault) of POCSO after observing that the prosecution "failed to prove" that the victim was a minor at the time of the incident.

It however said, "but for the offence punishable under Section 377 of the IPC, he shall be required to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 07 years. The amount of fine for the offence under Section 377 of IPC as imposed by the learned trial Court will remain the same and in default of payment thereof, he shall be required to undergo six month's rigorous imprisonment.The criminal appeal is allowed in part with the above modification in the sentence".

'Consensual Intercourse, Victim Habituated To Sex': Chhattisgarh High Court Acquits Man Of Rape Charges After 6 Yrs In Jail

Case Title: Tarun Sen v. State of Chhattisgarh

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Chh) 32

The Chhattisgarh High Court has acquitted a man convicted for commission of offences under Section 376(2)(n) (repeated rape on same woman) of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC') and Section 6 (aggravated penetrative sexual assault) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act ('POCSO Act') after finding lack of evidence to suggest minor age of the victim so also upon being convinced that the sexual intercourse was consensual, and that the victim was 'habitual' to sexual intercourse.

Passing order for release of the appellant, who has already spent nearly six years in jail, the Single Bench of Justice Arvind Kumar Verma observed –

“…she is a consenting party and even the Doctor PW-09 in her deposition has stated that she did not found any external and internal injury on the body of the victim as well as on her private part. The secondary sexual organs were fully developed and the prosecutrix was habitual of sexual intercourse.”

Merely Saying 'I Love You' To Girl Not Sexual Harassment Under POCSO Act: Chhattisgarh High Court

Case Title: State of Chhattisgarh v. Rupendra Das Manikpuri

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Chh) 70

The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that merely shouting “I love you” to a girl does not constitute sexual harassment as defined under Section 7 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Harassment Act, 2012 ('POCSO Act'), unless accompanied with 'sexual intent'.

While upholding the order of acquittal of the respondent/accused, the Bench of Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal observed –

“...the respondent shouted and expressed his love towards her saying "xxx I Love You". It is to be seen at this juncture that it was his solitary act while showing his “expression of love”, and a close scrutiny of her statements, vis-a-vis, the statements of her friends, would reveal the fact that it was not made with an intention of his “sexual desire”. It, thus, appears that the alleged expression of him alone would not constitute “sexual assault” as provided under Section 7 of the POCSO Act.”

Delhi High Court

Consensual Nature Of Relationship Irrelevant For Prosecution Under POCSO Act: Delhi High Court

Gauhati High Court

POCSO Act | Court Must Corroborate Victim's Testimony If Found To Be Unreliable: Gauhati High Court

Case Title: Promud Yadav v. The State of Assam & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Gau) 20

The Gauhati High Court recently set aside a conviction under Section 10 of the POCSO Act passed by the Trial Court on the ground that the victim's evidence was not found to be of sterling quality and was utilised without corroboration.

The single judge bench of Justice Mridul Kumar Kalita observed:

“This Court is of considered opinion that once it is found that the prosecutrix has not deposed truthfully before the Trial Court, her evidence no longer remains of a sterling quality and, therefore, it becomes unsafe for the Trial Court to rely on such testimony and to come to the finding of guilt of the appellant on the basis of uncorroborated testimony of such a witness. It is also pertinent to note that the victim, in this case, is also a child witness and, therefore, possibility of tutoring her may not be excluded.”

Robust Policy, Regular Training: Gauhati High Court Suggests Measures To Protect Children From Sexual Exploitation

Case Title: Sh. Laldinsanga v. State of Mizoram & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Gau) 25

The Gauhati High Court recently issued measures for safeguarding children from the menace of sexual violence and exploitation.

The single judge bench of Justice Kaushik Goswami observed:

“…under the Constitution of India, it is the obligation of the state to protect children. I cannot also be unmindful of the fact that children due to their tender age are often vulnerable to sexual predation. Younger children are even incapable of distinguishing between safe and unsafe touches. I am thus of the firm view that it is imperative that all stakeholders including child protection stakeholders, functionaries, and educational institutions, take proactive and stringent measures to safeguard children from the menace of sexual violence and exploitation…”

POCSO Victim's Testimony Loses Credibility When DNA Report Rules Out Accused As Biological Father: Gauhati High Court

Case title: Abdul Hamid v. State of Assam

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Gau) 59

The Gauhati High Court has held that when a DNA report conclusively rules out the accused as the biological father of the child born to the prosecutrix, the victim's testimony loses credibility.

A division bench of Justice Michael Zothankhuma and Justice Mitali Thakuria reiterated that the presumption under Section 29 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act operates only after the prosecution establishes foundational facts.

Gujarat High Court

Case Transferred To POCSO Court After 8-Yrs Trial: Gujarat HC Says Police, Prosecution & Trial Court Prima Facie Failed In Discharging Duty

Case Title: Thakor Vipulji Gamaji & Ors. vs State of Gujarat

Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 4

The Gujarat High Court recently lamented the failure on part of the Police, the prosecution and the trial court in an assault case, which came to be transferred to a POCSO Court, eight years after commencement of trial.

In his December 24 order, Justice Sandeep Bhatt observed that the victim had "categorically" deposed in her testimony in 2018 that at the time of incident, she was 15 years old. But despite this no action was taken by the Assistant Public Prosecutor nor the Presiding Officer who was conducting the trial.

It was only after eight years when the accused (Petitioners herein) filed Exhibit 99 for transfer of case to POCSO court, that the Magistrate Court amended the charges to include provisions of POCSO Act.

Gujarat High Court Awards ₹12 Lakh Compensation To Survivor Who Was Raped As A Minor, Had To Terminate Pregnancy

Case Title: XYZ vs State of Gujarat & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 54

The Gujarat High Court granted over Rs. 12 Lakh as compensation to a rape survivor–who was minor at the time of the incident in 2018–observing it is a “serious case of rape” where the survivor had passed though “aggravating circumstances”, physical harassment and mental trauma.

In doing so, the Court noted that the Trial Court passed a "non-speaking order" where it failed to provide adequate reasoning for awarding Rs 3 Lakh as compensation despite the gravity of the case wherein, the girl was raped several times and had to undergo medical termination of pregnancy. The court thus said that trial court should have awarded a higher compensation amount.

'Absolutely Irresponsible': Gujarat High Court Declines To Quash FIR Against Lawyer For Disclosing POCSO Victim's Name To Media

Case title: X v/s State of Gujarat and Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 147

The Gujarat High Court refused to quash the FIR against a woman advocate booked for disclosing the name of a POCSO victim by giving a media bite, stating that she behaved "absolutely irresponsibly as a professional as well as a human".

Justice Nirzar Desai in his order further observed that what was more glaring is that the applicant could not protect the "dignity, reputation, and privacy of a minor victim of an offence under the POCSO Act", despite being a woman and, "prima facie appears to have placed her professional interests and publicity above and ahead the interest of the minor victim".

It said:

"The question is not about pardoning the mistake of the present applicant. The question is, when a professional, merely to extract publicity, crosses the line drawn by law, whether such an act can be considered as an inadvertent mistake or not. The present applicant, as it prima facie appears, has not only disclosed the name of the victim girl while giving a media bite on social media but also, when the victim girl was accompanying her, influenced the victim girl to give a media bite on social media. Therefore, a thorough investigation into the offence in question is required, as the provisions of the Act are intended to protect the privacy and modesty of a victim of an offence under the POCSO Act or the Juvenile Justice Act".

Gujarat High Court Commutes Convict's Death Penalty For Raping Minor Girl, Says Trial Court Didn't Verify Possibility Of Reformation

Case title: STATE OF GUJARAT v/s JAYANTIBHAI @ LANGHO CHIMANBHAI SOLANKI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 226

The Gujarat High Court recently commuted the death sentence of a man to life imprisonment who was convicted by the trial court for raping a minor girl.

In doing so the court said that the trial court while sentencing the convict to death, did not give a finding on the aspect of the convict's reformation and the possibility that he will become a useful member to the society if is given a chance to do so.

A division bench of Justice Ilesh Vora and Justice RT Vachchani in its order referred to Supreme Court judgments on death penalty and the circumstances in which it is to be awarded and said:

"...it is implicit clear that the death sentence is to be awarded only in exceptional cases as it is obligatory on the part of the learned Court concerned to give a finding on the aspect of reformation and the possibility that the convict will become a useful member to the society in case he will be given a chance to do so. In nutshell, as per the guidelines indicated in Bachan Singh's case (supra) which otherwise applies to the facts of each individual case while imposing the death sentence, the Court concerned has to consider the gravity of extreme culpability, the mitigating circumstances, the social economic condition of the offender equating the way and the circumstances in which the crime has been committed; so also the victimisation of the person involved in the crime and the adverse societal impact of the crime in question. All these aspects require to be examined by calling for appropriate report/s and after recording such subjective satisfaction that there appears such extreme and exceptional circumstances leaving no room for the Court except to impose the death penalty".

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Sexual Assault Child Victim Has No Locus To File Quashing Plea In Name Of Saving Family's Honour, Future: Himachal Pradesh HC

Case Title: X vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and another

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (HP) 4

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has observed that after setting the criminal machinery into motion, the complainant's role ends, and the complainant or the child victim has no locus standing to file the petition for quashing a POCSO Case, that too, in the name of saving the family's honour.

Minor Girl's Claim Of Being 18+ Or Aadhar Showing Her As Major Doesn't Help Case Of Accused Booked Under POCSO Act: HP High Court

Case title - Rishi Kumar vs. State of Himachal Pradesh

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (HP) 141

The Himachal Pradesh High Court recently observed that a minor girl's representation of herself as being above 18 years of age or an Aadhar card entry showing her as a major cannot help an accused facing charges under the POCSO Act.

A bench of Justice Rakesh Kainthla thus rejected an accused's regular bail plea, who is facing charges of offences under Sections 363 and 376 of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

POCSO Act | Accused Cannot Be Denied Bail Merely Because Victims Were Traumatised: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Case Name: Adil V/s State of H.P.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (HP) 143

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has granted bail to four accused in a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, holding that bail cannot be denied merely on the ground that the victims would be traumatised.

Noting the submission of the State, Justice Rakesh Kainthla remarked that: “There is a force in the submission made on behalf of the respondent/State that the victims would be traumatised by the acts of the petitioners. However, that is not sufficient to deny bail to the petitioners”.

Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court

J&K&L High Court Grants Bail To 75-Yr-Old Grandfather Accused By Granddaughter In POCSO Case, Says Involvement Is 'Highly Doubtful'

Case Title: Ghulam Nabi Ganai Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 345

In a sensitive case involving allegations by a granddaughter against her own grandfather, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh granted bail to a 75-year-old accused, holding that the very edifice of the prosecution case crumbled during trial, and that continued incarceration would be legally impermissible.

Karnataka High Court

Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To BS Yediyurappa In POCSO Case, Trial Court Directed To Decide On Cognizance Afresh

Case title: BS Yediyurappa v/s The Criminal Investigating Department CID

Case No: WP 15522/2024

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 50

The Karnataka High Court on Friday (February 7) set aside the trial order taking cognizance of offences alleged against former Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa in a case registered under the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) Act

In doing so the court partly allowed his plea for quashing the POCSO Case; it however remitted the matter back to the trial court while saying that the the probe and final report remains intact. The court however allowed his plea seeking anticipatory bail.

Justice M Nagaprasanna while pronouncing the order said: "Petition is allowed in part. Order of taking cognizance stands obliterated. The crime and investigation and final report remains intact. Matter remitted back to the trial court. All contentions remain open".

Karnataka High Court Quashes POCSO Complaint Lodged By Sister Against Her Brothers Over Property Dispute

Case Title: X & others AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.6965 OF 2024

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 164

While quashing an FIR registered on the complaint of a woman under POCSO Act against her brothers, the Karnataka High Court noted that the siblings were fighting over property and it was in this light the crime was registered as a counter-blast which cannot be accepted.

Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition and quashed the prosecution initiated against the petitioners under Sections 8(Punishment for sexual assault) and 12(Punishment for sexual harassment) POCSO Act and Sections 354(Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty), 506(criminal intimidation) and 34(common intention) of the IPC.

DNA Profiling Not 100% Accurate, Can't Be Sole Basis For POCSO Conviction In Absence Of Corroborative Evidence: Karnataka High Court

Case Title: State of Karnataka AND Nagesh

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100570 OF 2022

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 251

The Karnataka High Court has said that DNA reports cannot be solely relied on to convict the accused who is charged for offences punishable under provisions of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act (POCSO).

A division bench of Justice R Nataraj and Justice Rajesh Rai K held thus while dismissing an appeal filed by prosecution challenging a trial court order dated 27-08-2021, acquitting the accused Nagesh who was charged for offences punishable under 376(2) of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO.

The court said, “Except the DNA report, absolutely no other corroborative piece of evidence is available on record to connect the accused with the alleged offence. The victim herself firmly stated that the accused did not have any sexual intercourse with her. She is not aware who the father of her child is. Even her parents and relatives also deposed similarly. In such circumstances, the DNA report cannot be solely relied on to convict the accused.”

'POCSO Act Is Gender Neutral': Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash FIR Against Woman Booked For Sexually Assaulting Minor Boy

Case Title: Archana Patil AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRL.P 12777/2024

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 282

The Karnataka High Court on Monday (August 18) dismissed a 52-year-old woman's plea for quashing a sexual assault complaint registered by the parents of a minor boy against her under the POCSO Act, observing that the provisions of the Act apply to both men and women and thus the act is "gender neutral".

Justice M Nagaprasanna while pronouncing the order said “POSCO Act being a progressive enactment is intended to safe guard sanctity of childhood it is rooted in gender neutrality with its beneficient object being protection of children, irrespective of sex. The act is thus gender neutral.”

It added, “Section 3 and 5 (POCSO Act), which form the foundation of offences under sections 4 and 6 of the Act delineate various forms of assault, although certain provisions may employ gendered pronouns the preamble and the purpose of the act render such usage inclusive, therefore it is inclusive of both male and female...The ingredients of Section 4 of the Act dealing with penetrative sexual assault are equally applicable to both men and women. The language of provision clearly indicates inclusivity, the ingredients of offences the once punishable under section 4 and 6 are clearly met in the case at hand, albeit prima facie.”

'Taking Advantage Of Her Poverty Is Ruthless': Karnataka High Court Denies Bail To Senior Citizen Accused Of Raping Minor Girl

Case Title: Channappar AND State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1593 OF 2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 336

Denying bail to a 68-year-old man who along with other accused were booked for the gang rape of a minor girl, the Karnataka High Court remarked that the act of committing sexual assault by taking advantage of the victim's poverty and her community is a "ruthless act".

Justice S Rachaiah dismissed the appeal filed by Channappar @ Rajaiah who was charged Sections 376(3)(rape of girl under 16 years), 376(2)(n)(commits rape repeatedly on the same woman), 376(DA) (Punishment for gang rape on woman under sixteen years of age) read with section 149(common object) of IPC as well as provisions of the POCSO Act and the SC ST (Prevention of Atrocities) ACT.

Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash POCSO Case Against Former CM Yediyurappa, But His Appearance During Trial May Be Exempted

Case Title: BS Yediyurappa AND The Criminal Investigating Department

Case No: WP 7447/2025 c/w WP 7322/2025

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 387

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash the POCSO case lodged against former Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa.

Justice M I Arun thus upheld the trial court order dated February 28— taking cognizance of the alleged offence and issuing summons to the former MP.

The single judge however asked the trial court not to insist upon the BJP leader's appearance, unless it is necessary during the course of the trial. It ordered that the trail court "will entertain the exemption application filed on behalf of A-1, unless his presence is essential."

Kerala High Court

Failure To Report POCSO Offences Not An Exception To Sanction For Prosecuting Public Servants U/S 197 CrPC Or U/S 218 BNSS: Kerala HC

Case Name: George P.O v. State of Kerala and another.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 11

The Kerala High Court has observed that Section 19 of POCSO Act which mandates reporting of POCSO offence is not carved out as an exception to Section 197 CrPC which pertains to requirement of sanction to prosecute public servants.

In doing so Justice K. Babu observed that Section 197 CrPC/Section 218 BNSS are meant to safeguard the public servants from being dragged into vexatious proceedings while discharging official duty.

Mandate U/S 19 POCSO Act To Report Offence Is To Be Performed By A Person In Personal Capacity: Kerala HC Quashes Case Against Ex-CWC Head

Case Name: George P.O v. State of Kerala and another.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 11

The Kerala High Court (on December 20) observed that the mandate of reporting offences provided under Section 19 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 is not of an official character and the person has to report it in his personal capacity.

Kerala High Court Declines Pre-Arrest Bail To Actor-Comedian KR Jayachandran In POCSO Case

Case Title: K R Jayachandran v State Of Kerala

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 21

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (January 14) dismissed the pre arrest bail application filed by Malayalam actor and comedian K R Jayachandran for allegedly committing penetrative sexual assault on a four year old minor.

He is alleged to have committed offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n) and 376AB of IPC and under Sections 5(l), 5(m), 5(n) and 5(p) read with Section 6 of POCSO Act. It is alleged that the actor applied his fingers and tongue upon the genitals of the minor and committed penetrative sexual assault.

Mechanically Implicating Doctor U/S 21 POCSO Act For Not Reporting Crime Against Minor 'Absolute Injustice', Causes Mental Trauma: Kerala HC

Case Title: Dr. T. Ambujakshi v State of Kerala 

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 51

The Kerala High Court has asked the investigating officers to be extra cautious while implicating doctors as accused for failing to report commission of crime against minor under Section 19 read with read with Section 21 of the POCSO Act. 

The Court further stated that arraying doctors mechanically in criminal proceedings as accused is absolute injustice and causes mental trauma to doctors which would prevent them from discharging their duties.

Justice A. Badharudeen thus ordered that unwarranted implication of doctors in POCSO cases must be avoided unless there is deliberate intention or omission to report the commission of a crime.

Kerala HC Grants Anticipatory Bail To Reporter TV Editors In POCSO Case, Says 'Inappropriate Questions' To Child Should Have Been Avoided

Case Title: Arun Kumar K. and Another v State of Kerala

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 80

The Kerala High Court on Monday (February 3) allowed the anticipatory bail applications filed by Malayalam news channel Reporter TV's consulting editor Arun Kumar K. and Sub-editor Shabas Ahammed. The duo were booked under Section 11(i) of the POCSO Act for allegedly sexually harassing a girl child through words and gestures.

Justice P. V. Kunhikrishnan observed that prime facie, while the allegations did not constitute a criminal offence under the POSCO Act, the Court stated that the reporters asked the child inappropriate questions which could have been avoided.

When Doctor Who Initially Treated POCSO Victim Reported Crime To Police, Action Against Subsequent Doctor U/S 21 Is Unwarranted: Kerala HC

Case Title: Dr V K Sulochana v State of Kerala

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 81

The Kerala High Court has held that the POCSO Act does not provide an outer limit for reporting of offences to the Police, and that the intent is to report to the Police without delay.

The Court was considering whether a doctor, who treated the victim subsequently, could be held criminally liable for failing to report the commission of offences under the POCSO Act, when the information had already been provided to the police by the doctor who initially treated the victim.

Justice A. Badharudeen stated that since the FIR has been registered based on information given by the first doctor to the Police without delay, criminal proceedings against the Petitioner is unwarranted and lacks justification.

Often False POCSO Case Launched Against Spouse To Avoid Handing Over Minor Child's Custody: Kerala High Court

Case Title: XX v State of Kerala and Another

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 100

Kerala High Court while quashing a POCSO case filed by the mother on behalf of her child against her divorced husband observed that there are instances where one spouse uses their minor child to file false POCSO case against the other, to win custody cases.

“In cases when the husband and wife are in loggerheads and one among them sues for custody of a minor child, there are instances whereby the other spouse who is not ready to part with the custody of the minor used to fabricate facts to implicate the facts to implicate the other spouse in PoCSO offences by using the child whose custody is sought for. The intention behind implicating the spouse who demands custody of the child is to avoid the claim for custody.”

Kerala High Court Grants Bail To Man Booked For Sexually Abusing Granddaughter, Notes His Custody Was Causing Further Trauma To Victim

Case Title: AS v State of Kerala

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 104

The Kerala High Court released a POCSO accused on bail considering that his prolonged custody was causing trauma to the victim. The accused was the step-grandfather of the victim and she was relying on him for her livelihood.

Considering the extraordinary situation, Justice P. V. Kunhikrishnan granted bail to the accused.

“From the above report, it is clear that the grandmother and the victim are relying on the petitioner for their livelihood. The victim is now facing trauma because, in her instance, her grandfather is kept in custody…Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I think the petitioner can be released on bail, after imposing stringent conditions.”

Defense Counsel Can't Be Precluded From Cross-Examining Child Witness Unless He Misuses Liberty & Makes Child Uncomfortable: Kerala HC

Case Title: Abdul Azeez v State of Kerala

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 108

The Kerala High Court has ruled that there are no statutory provisions in the newly enacted criminal laws, the POCSO Act, or the Guidelines for Recording of Evidence of Vulnerable Witnesses of 2024 issued by the High Court that permit screening of child witness from the defense counsel.

Justice C. Jayachandran observed that it must be presumed that the legislature has considered all the relevant aspects and consciously decided not to screen the vulnerable witness from the defense counsel.

POCSO Act | Physical Contact Of Penis With Female Genital Constitutes 'Penetrative Sexual Assault', Vaginal Insertion Not Necessary: Kerala HC

Case Title: x v The Deputy Superintendent of Police and Another

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 134

The Kerala High Court has held that penetration of male genital organ within the labia majora or vulva without penetrating the vagina will constitute the offence of penetrative sexual assault under Section 3 of POCSO Act.

The Division Bench comprising Justice P. B. Suresh Kumar and Justice Jobin Sebastian read the explanation of 'vagina' given under Section 375 of IPC into the POCSO Act by way of Section 2(2) of POCSO Act.

“… penetration of the male genital organ within the labia majora or the vulva, with or without any emission of semen or even an attempt at penetration into the private part of the victim completely, partially or slightly would make out the offence of penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act as well.”

Not Mandatory To Obtain Sanction To Prosecute Public Servant For Failing To Report POCSO Offences, S. 19 Contains Non-Obstante Clause: Kerala HC

Case Title: Dr Ditto Tom P. v State of Kerala

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 136

The Kerala High Court has held that it is not mandatory to obtain sanction under Section 197 of CrPC or Section 218 of the BNSS to prosecute a public servant under Sections 19 and 21 of the POCSO Act for failing to report POCSO Offences 

The Court made this ruling on noting that Section 19 which mandates reporting of POCSO offences begins with a non-obstante clause, 'Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973' and thus it excludes the applicability of Section 42A of the Act.

Kerala High Court Entrusts KeLSA With Creating Awareness Against Child Marriages In Tribal Communities Of Wayanad

Case Title: Suo Motu v State of Kerala and Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 156

The Kerala High Court has entrusted Kerala State Legal Service Authority (KeLSA) with creating awareness about the ills of child marriage in the tribal communities in Wayanad.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice S. Manu was dealing with a suo motu petition on the practice of child marriage prevalent in some tribal communities in Wayanad. Some tribal communities in Wayand as a customary practice marry at an early age and as a result of which many members of the community face trial for the offences under the POCSO Act.

Kerala High Court Quashes POCSO Case Against Asianet News' Journalists, Staff Booked For Disclosing Survivor's Identity To Get High TRP

Case Title: Sindhu S. and Others v State of Kerala

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 236

The Kerala High Court on Friday (April 11) quashed a POCSO case registered against Asianet News journalists and staff for allegedly conspiring and disclosing the identity of a minor rape survivor, in order to get high TRP.

Justice A. Badharudeen observed that the alleged offences are not made out from the facts of the case. It however cautioned channels against airing allegations without hearing the other side or enquiring into the truth of the allegations. 

Serious POCSO Offences Can Be Quashed On Settlement Between Parties If There Exist 'Extreme Mitigating Circumstances': Kerala High Court

Case Title: XX v YY

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 250

While quashing two cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act where the accused and victims got married, the Kerala High Court observed that though generally POCSO offences cannot be quashed on the ground of settlement between parties, however, in "extreme mitigating circumstances", not quashing the proceedings may result in injustice.

Justice C. Jayachandran opined that there cannot be an absolute stand that no POCSO case can be quashed.

[POCSO Act] Can't Conclude Sexual Intention Of Doctor During Medical Exam Based On Victim Labelling It As 'Bad Touch': Kerala High Court

Case Title: Dr. C. M. Aboobacker v State of Kerala and Another

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 350

The Kerala High Court set aside a POCSO case against an octogenarian paediatrician who was alleged to have committed aggravated sexual assault on a 10th standard student during a medical examination. The doctor had approached the High Court to quash further proceedings in the case, saying that whatever he had done was within the parameters of clinical examination. He had stated that the examination was done in the presence of a close relative of the child.

Justice G. Girish observed that for offences of sexual assault under IPC and POCSO, it was important to show that the act was committed with sexual intention. The Court said that it was hard to believe that the petitioner made sexual advances to the victim in the presence of her mother or sister. The Court also noted that the victim had approached the hospital with complaints of chest pain and abdominal pain, and only after checking with the stethoscope, the doctor proceeded to press her breasts.

S.348 BNSS | Kerala High Court Refuses To Recall POCSO Victim For Further Examination To Change Evidence On Compromise

Case Title: Shiju Krishnan v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 472

The Kerala High Court has recently held that the powers under Section 311 CrPC or corresponding Section 348 BNSS cannot be invoked to recall a POCSO or rape victim for further cross-examination for changing the evidence given during trial.

Justice G. Girish reiterated the settled-position that the powers under Section 311 Cr.P.C. cannot be invoked in a routine manner, and can only be exercised if there are valid and sufficient grounds. The judge opined that the petitioner's attempt to compel the victim to state that the incident of rape did not occur amounted to degrading the sanctity and credibility of judicial proceedings.

Kerala High Court Quashes POCSO Case Against Youth After Victim Expresses Intent To Continue Romantic Relationship

Case Title: XXX v. State of Kerala and Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 551

The Kerala High Court recently quashed criminal proceedings against an 18-year-old man in an alleged case of sexual assault under the POCSO Act, after recording that neither the victim nor her parents had any complaints against him.

Justice G. Girish recorded that in the affidavit filed before the Court, the victim, who is now 18 years old, even expressed her intention to continue her romantic relationship with the petitioner.

Kerala High Court Grants Bail To Youth Accused Of Intimidating Minor Despite 21 Prior Cases, Notes Probe Is Complete

Case Title: Muhammed Anwarsha v State of Kerala

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 588

The Kerala High Court has granted bail to a man accused of offences under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and ST/ ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 despite his being involved in 21 other criminal offences.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas while allowing his regular bail plea noted that even though the petitioner is involved in 21 other crimes, considering his young age and since he has been in custody for 90 days, the bail can be granted.

Madhya Pradesh High Court

'She's Minor': MP High Court Refuses To Let 17-Yr-Old Stay With Partner But Lets Her Continue Pregnancy

Case Title: Prosecutrix X v State of Madhya Pradesh

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 162

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently directed police authorities to shift a pregnant girl– stated to be in a relationship with and residing with her partner booked under POCSO Act– after observing that the girl being a minor cannot reside with him.

'Trial Courts Consistently Failing To Perform Judge's Duties Despite Regular Training': MP High Court While Acquitting Rape Convict

Case Title: DK v State of Madhya Pradesh (2025:MPHC-JBP:38420)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 180

The Madhya Pradesh High Court overturned the conviction passed by the Trial Court under the POCSO Act, noting that the trial court had 'committed several irregularities'.

The court noted that the trial court failed to take 'cognizance of ossification test report available on record and, secondly, it did not pose questions under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. to the accused/applicant on the basis of the DNA test report'.

Case Title: DK v State of Madhya Pradesh (2025:MPHC-JBP:38420)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 180

Subsequent Marriage During Bail Or Birth Of Child 'Immaterial' In POCSO Act Offence: MP High Court Upholds 20-Yr Jail Term

Case title - SAJAN BHATT Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 283

The Madhya Pradesh High Court (Jabalpur Bench) recently observed that the subsequent event of marriage during bail or the birth of a child out of such wedlock are 'immaterial' to show indulgence in offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

A bench of Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Ramkumar Choubey added that while the Supreme Court may grant relief in such cases exercising its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, such power is not available to the High Court.

Madras High Court

S.21 POCSO Act | Doctor Not Responsible To 'Verify' Age Of Victim Or' Ascertain' If Offence Has Been Committed: Madras High Court

Case Title: Dr Jenbagalakshmi v The State of Tamil Nadu and Another

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 4

The Madras High Court has recently observed that a Doctor does not have a responsibility to 'verify' or 'ascertain' the age of a victim brought in for abortion, for the purposes of reporting crime under POCSO Act.

Section 19 of the POCSO Act put a legal obligation on a person to inform the relevant authorities when he/she has knowledge that an offence under the Act had been committed. Section 21 deals with the punishment for failing to report or record a sexual offence.

The High Court relied on the decision of the Apex Court in SR. Tessy Jose and others v State of Kerala which held that the 'knowledge' requirement foisted on the Doctor cannot be that they ought to have 'deduced' from circumstances that an offence has been committed. It thus quashed the case lodged against a Doctor for failing to report an incident.

Courts Should Not Insist On Conducting 'Potency Tests' On Accused Persons In A Routine Manner: Madras High Court

Case Title: Kajendran J v. Superintendent of Police and Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 53

The Madras High Court has asked the courts across the state of Tamil Nadu not to insist on conducting potency tests on accused persons in a routine manner. The court also directed the Director General of Police to issue circulars to the departments asking the officers to refrain from sending the accused for potency test in a mechanical manner.

The bench of Justice Anand Venkatesh and Justice Sunder Mohan, which was constituted to monitor the implementation of provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and the Juvenile Justice Act on the judicial side, made the observations after being informed that while there was awareness against Two-Finger tests in the state, instances of male potency tests still continued.

The bench also noted that despite previous orders and a circular issued by the DGP, minor boys who were involved in romantic relationships with minor girls were mechanically arrested and produced before the Juvenile Justice Boards, which then sent the minor boys to the observation homes. The court noted that such procedure ran counter to the earlier circulars and the orders of the court and thus directed the DGP to re-familiarise the police officials regarding the circular, making them aware of the procedure to be followed in such cases.

Madras High Court Declines To Interfere With Order To Register FIR Against News Channel For Allegedly Revealing Identity Of POCSO Victim

Case Title: News Tamil 24x7 v. Shruthi Thilak and Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 89

The Madras High Court has recently refused to interfere with an order of the Special Judge for POCSO cases, Chennai, directing registration of an FIR against a Tamil news channel for allegedly revealing the identity of a victim in a POCSO case. As per Section 23 of the Act, media is restricted from disclosing the identity of the child, including name, address, photograph, family details, etc and any contravention of the rules is punishable with imprisonment which shall not be less than 6 months but may extend to 1 year or with fine or both.

Justice P Velmurugan noted that no prejudice would be caused to the news channel if an FIR was registered and an investigation was carried on by the jurisdictional police. The court added that mere irregularity by the Special Judge could not be treated as an illegality. Further, considering the seriousness of the offence, the court was not inclined to set aside the order or stay the investigation.

Unnecessarily Subjecting Child To Medical Exam Will Cause More Mental Stress: Madras HC Asks Hospitals To Examine Victims Based On Complaint In POCSO Cases

Case Title: Kajendran J v. The Superintendent of Police

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 106

Noticing the routine manner in which every child in a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) was being subjected to medical examination mechanically, the Madras High Court has asked the doctors and hospitals to conduct medical examinations based on the nature of the complaint.

A special bench of Justice N Anand Venkatesh and Justice Sunder Mohan, which has been monitoring the implementation of the POCSO Act, observed that though Section 27 of the POCSO Act provided for medical examination of a child against whom 'any' offence had been committed, when the Section was read with Section 164A of the CrPC, it had to be understood that the medical examination was with respect to cases in which there was a penetrative sexual assault.

However, the court added that medical examination could not be done away with for all cases falling under Sections 7,9, and 11 of the Act. The court was conscious that there may be cases where though the offence was that of sexual assault, the child might have suffered injury that needed to be examined. Thus, the court asked the doctors examining the child to decide on the tests to be conducted based on the complaint of the child.

POCSO Offence Is Committed Against Society, Accepting Defence Of Subsequent Marriage With Victim Will Defeat Purpose Of Act: Madras HC

Case Title: Vijayakumar v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 161

While reversing the acquittal of a man charged under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, the Madras High Court recently held that the defence of subsequent marriage between the victim and the accused does not take away the offence committed by the accused while the victim was a child.

Justice P Velmurugan observed that the offence under the POCSO Act was an offence against the society and not just the individual. He added that if the defence of subsequent marriage is accepted and the accused is acquitted, it would defeat the whole purpose of enactment of the Act and would lead to disastrous consequences.

Though the accused prayed for a lesser sentence saying that the victim was pregnant and there was no elder to take care of her, the court noted that it did not have any authority to give a punishment lesser than the one prescribed under the Special Act. The court thus sentenced the accused to undergo minimum sentence of 10 years simple imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000.

'Age Wasn't Proven': Madras High Court Acquits Father & Priest Accused Of Molesting Minor Under POCSO, Charges Them Under IPC

Case Title: Sivakumar v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 171

The Madras High Court recently acquitted a father and a priest who were accused of molesting a minor girl under different circumstances. While acquitting the petitioners (accused) under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, the court noted that the date of birth certificate issued by the headmistress was not in the nature of any public or official register.

The bench of Justice AD Jagadish Chandira and Justice K Rajasekar noted that the certificate did not fulfil the requisites of Section 35 of the Indian Evidence Act and was not a birth certificate issued by the school. Thus, the court held that the certificate was not sufficient to prove the age of the victim girl. Noting that the prosecution had failed to prove the age of the victim girl in accordance with Section 94(2) of the Juvenile Justice Act, the court held that the offences under the POCSO Act could not be attracted.

POCSO Act | Madras HC 'Shocked' At Prosecution For Not Seeking Further Probe After Negative DNA Report Of Accused; Orders Re-Investigation

Case Title: XXX v. The Inspector of Police

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 222

The Madras High Court recently ordered a re-investigation in a POCSO case after noting that the police had failed to conduct further investigation when the DNA test of the accused gave a negative result. The court said that a further investigation was crucial to find the actual culprit in the case.

Justice K Murali Shankar said that POCSO offences are serious in nature stressing that it was high time for the prosecution to ensure a proper investigation.

POCSO Victim Or Their Parents Need Not Be Involved In Appeal Against Conviction, But Must Be Impleaded For Suspension Of Sentence: Madras HC

Case Title: Venkateshwaran v. State of Tamil Nadu

Citation: 2025 Livelaw (Mad) 339

The Madras High Court recently observed that in offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, it was not necessary to involve the victims of their parents. The court, however, added that impleading the victim, their family or the de facto complainant was essential in case of regular bail applications and for suspension of sentence.

Justice K Murali Shankar clarified that the victims in POCSO cases should not be directly involved in the proceedings, and any notice that should be served to them must be through the address provided by the State Counsel.

Madras High Court Asks Judicial Academy To Provide Special Training To Judicial Officers Over Non-Compliance With S.35 POCSO Act

Case Title: Uma Maheshwari v. The Principal Secretary to Government

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 350

The Madras High Court has asked the Tamil Nadu State Judicial Academy to conduct a special training session for judges presiding over the special courts dealing with offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

The bench of Justice CV Karthikeyan and Justice R Vijayakumar made the request after noting that many special courts were not complying with the mandate under Section 35 of the Act, which required the courts to examine the victim child within 30 days from the date of taking cognisance of the chargesheet.

The court told the Judicial Academy that the training session should sensitise the officers about the statutory requirement and the importance of promptly taking cognisance of chargesheets.

Madras High Court Sends Judicial Officer To Training For Convicting POCSO Accused Based On Victim's Statement U/S 164 CrPC

Case Title: Palraj v. Inspector Of Police

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 352

The Madras High Court has asked a Judicial Officer to be sent to the State Judicial Academy to attend training programs to understand the fundamentals of criminal law.

The bench of Justice AD Jagadish Chandira and Justice R Poornima gave directions to the registry after noting that the judge, who was presiding over the Special Court for POCSO cases, had found a man guilty based on the victim's statement under Section 164 of the CrPC.

Madras High Court Upholds Life Sentence Of Man Who Sexually Abused, Impregnated Daughter's Friend

Case Title: Murugesan @ Murugesh v. The State and Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 358

The Madras High Court has upheld the conviction and sentence imposed on a man for sexually assaulting and impregnating his daughter's friend, who was a minor and belonged to the Scheduled Caste community.

The bench of Justice MS Ramesh and Justice V Lakshminarayanan remarked that the case was yet another example of how children from the vulnerable sections of society were placed in unfortunate positions.

Offence Purely Personal: Madras High Court Quashes POCSO Case Against Man Who Married 17-Year-Old Girl

Case Title: Kamaraj v. State and Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 381

The Madras High Court has quashed a case against a man under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, for allegedly committing sexual assault on a minor girl.

Justice N Sathish Kumar relied on the decisions of the Supreme Court, where the court had laid down guidelines that must be taken into consideration by the courts while quashing non-compoundable offences. As per the principles, if the crime is purely against society with overriding public interest, it cannot be quashed even if the parties have entered into a settlement.

In the present case, the court noted that the offence was purely personal and involved the future of two young persons in their early twenties. The court added that no useful purpose will be served in continuing the criminal proceedings and it would only cause mental agony to the accused, victim and their parents.

"Protector Became The Source Of Suffering": Madras High Court Upholds Father's Conviction For Sexually Harassing His Minor Daughters

Case Title: S v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 414

The Madras High Court has upheld the conviction and sentence of a man for sexually harassing his two minor daughters.

The bench of Justice N Sathish Kumar and Justice M Jothiraman commented that it was a peculiar case and it was painful to see that the father, who was expected to be the protector, had in turn become the cause of suffering for the kids.

Noting that the father was a drunkard and the heinous acts were done in an inebriated state, the court added that the case was an example of how alcohol addiction destroys the harmony of a family and erodes moral values. The court added that the evils of alcohol not only affect the individual's health but also destroy the peace and sanctity of a family.

Misuse Of POCSO Act Undermines Its Objective, Trial Courts Must Take Action Against Persons Filing False Complaints: Madras High Court

Case Title: Sahirsha @ MS Sha v. State of Tamil Nadu

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 422

The Madras High Court recently remarked that there has been an increase in misuse of provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act to settle personal scores, which ultimately undermines the true object of the Act.

Justice B. Pugalendhi thus directed the trial courts to make sure that cases are registered under Section 22 of the POCSO Act against adults giving false complaints under the Act.

Orissa High Court

'Raises Concerns About Competence Of Judge': Orissa HC Sets Aside Order In POCSO Case Wrongly Treating Major Accused As 'Juvenile'

Case Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ori) 27

The Orissa High Court heavily criticized a Special Court under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act ('POCSO Act') for treating an accused as 'juvenile' and referring the case to Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) despite having enough materials to suggest that the last act in the 'continuing offence' was committed by the accused much after he attained majority. While reprimanding the senior judicial officer (in the cadre of District Judge) for such procedural error, the Single Bench of Dr. Justice Sanjeeb Kumar Panigrahi observed –

“The notion that proceedings should commence under juvenile jurisdiction simply because the accused was a minor at the inception of a continuing offence is a proposition so untenable, so discordant with established legal doctrine, that it raises profound concerns, not merely about the fairness and reliability of the adjudication, but about the very competence of the judge who rendered it.”

Adolescent Inter-Faith Relationship: Orissa HC Quashes POCSO Case Against Muslim Man After He Marries Victim, Says Romantic Relationship Not Coercion

Case Title: Fayazuddin Khan @ Badal Khan v. State of Odisha & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ori) 43

The High Court has recently quashed charges, inter alia, under the stringent Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act ('POCSO Act') against a Muslim man, accused of kidnapping a minor Hindu girl and having repeated sexual intercourse with her, as he later married the victim girl and started a happy matrimonial life. Taking into account the interest of the parties vis-à-vis the prevalent law, the Single Bench of Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra observed –

“Running a trial against the petitioner in this case would amount to an abuse of the process of law, particularly given the fact that the victim and the petitioner have entered into a marital relationship and are living together in harmony. Sending the man to prison would not only be unjust but would also work against the best interests of the victim, as it could disrupt the peaceful life they have built together.”

'POCSO Act Not A Tool To Enforce Society's Outdated Moral Codes': Orissa High Court Grants Interim Bail To Accused To Marry Victim

Case Title: Hamid Sha v. State of Odisha

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ori) 73

The Orissa High Court held that the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act ('POCSO Act') cannot be used as a tool for enforcing outdated moral codes or to criminalise adolescent romantic relationships in order to deter “socially non-conforming behaviour” irrespective of it being consensual in nature. The Single Bench of Dr. Justice Sanjeeb Kumar Panigrahi accentuated the need for differentiation between genuine cases of victimisation and instances of consensual romantic relationship between close-aged adolescents.

S. 250(1) BNSS | POCSO Accused Can File Discharge Application Within 60 Days Of Receiving Police Papers: Orissa HC Issues Directions

Case Title: Narottam Prusty v. State of Odisha & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ori) 123

Filling a legislative gap concerning interplay of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ('BNSS') and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act ('POCSO Act') regarding limitation period for filing a 'discharge application', the Orissa High Court held that an accused under the latter enactment can prefer an application seeking discharge under Section 250(1) of the BNSS within sixty days from the date on which he is furnished with the police papers, as provided under Section 231, BNSS. Addressing the issue, which arose due to the absence of a specific 'committal provision' under the POCSO Act, the Bench of Justice Aditya Kumar Mohapatra held –

“…this Court is persuaded to take the considerate view that in cases before Special Courts instituted under special statutes like the POCSO Act, as in the present matter, where there is no contemplation for committal of the case to the Sessions Court, the time period of 60 days for preferring a discharge application under Section 250(1) BNSS may be so interpreted as commencing from the date of supply of documents and police papers to the accused.”

Orissa High Court Quashes 'Strange' Order By POCSO Court Denying Bail To School Principal Booked In Bailable Offence

Case Title: Ramesh Chandra Sahoo v. State of Orissa

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ori) 136

The Orissa High Court quashed an order passed by a Special Court under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ('POCSO Act') which denied bail to the Principal of a Higher Secondary School for failing to report alleged sexual harassment meted out to a minor female student by a Lecturer. While setting aside the impugned order, the Bench of Justice Gourishankar Satapathy expressed shock that despite the alleged offence under Section 21(2) of the POCSO Act being 'bailable' in nature, the Special Judge denied bail to the petitioner and sent him to custody. Being stupefied by the order, the Court observed–

“It is strange, but true that despite making an in-depth analysis of facts and allegations raised against the petitioner, the learned trial Court has rejected the bail application of the petitioner and remanded him to custody. This Court therefore, has no other option left, but to quash the impugned order…”

'Raises Concerns About Competence Of Judge': Orissa HC Sets Aside Order In POCSO Case Wrongly Treating Major Accused As 'Juvenile'

Case Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ori) 27

The Orissa High Court heavily criticized a Special Court under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act ('POCSO Act') for treating an accused as 'juvenile' and referring the case to Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) despite having enough materials to suggest that the last act in the 'continuing offence' was committed by the accused much after he attained majority. While reprimanding the senior judicial officer (in the cadre of District Judge) for such procedural error, the Single Bench of Dr. Justice Sanjeeb Kumar Panigrahi observed –

“The notion that proceedings should commence under juvenile jurisdiction simply because the accused was a minor at the inception of a continuing offence is a proposition so untenable, so discordant with established legal doctrine, that it raises profound concerns, not merely about the fairness and reliability of the adjudication, but about the very competence of the judge who rendered it.”

Patna High Court

Prosecution Must Prove Victim's Age U/S 94 Juvenile Justice Act For POCSO To Apply: Patna High Court

Case Title: XXX v. State of Bihar

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 88

The Patna High Court recently held that in prosecutions under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, the age of the victim must be conclusively established either through school records or medical evidence, as required under Section 94(2) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

Justice Alok Kumar Pandey made these observations while hearing a criminal appeal arising from an acquittal order passed by the Trial Court, which had acquitted the accused of offences under the Indian Penal Code and the POCSO Act.

'External Rubbing' Does Not Constitute Penetrative Sexual Assault Under POCSO Act: Patna High Court

Case Title: Jai Krishna Yadav v. State of Bihar

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 95

The Patna High Court has recently clarified that “external rubbing” does not fall within the statutory definition of penetrative sexual assault under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (“POCSO”). The Court further held that in cases where medical evidence negates the possibility of penetration, a conviction cannot rest solely on the uncorroborated testimony of a child witness.

A Division Bench of the High Court, comprising Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad and Justice Sourendra Pandey made these observations while hearing an appeal arising from the conviction of the appellant under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

Punjab and Haryana High Court

POCSO Case Can't Be Compromised Between Victim & Accused Even When They Get Married: Punjab & Haryana High Court Explains

Title: XXX v. XXX

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 306

The Punjab & Haryana High Court refused to quash a rape case under POCSO Act on the basis of compromise between the victim and the accused.

The man was accused of raping a 13-year-old victim. Allegedly the victim was enticed away by the petitioner and she stayed with him and was recovered after four months by the police from the custody of the accused. The offences involved in the present case are Sections 363, 366-A, 376, 34 IPC and Sections 4 and 12 of POCSO Act.

Offence Under POCSO Act Against Public Morality, Court's Duty To Acts As Child's Guardian: P&H High Court Rejects Pre-Arrest Bail

Title: XXXX v. XXXX

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 342

Reaffirming the seriousness and gravity of offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that such crimes strike against public morality.

The Court rejected the anticipatory bail of a man, accused of committing rape on a minor, an offence under Sections 137 (kidnapping), 96 (procuration of child), 3(5) (common intention), 64(1) (rape) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 4 (penetrative sexual assault) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

Rajasthan High Court

Rajasthan High Court Questions Special POCSO Judge For Denying Bail To Man Not Named In Victim Statement

Title: Ramesh v State of Rajasthan

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 8

Expressing “anguish and pain” over denial of bail to a man not even named by the minor victim in her statement, the Rajasthan High Court has sought explanation from a Special POCSO Judge for his decision.

The bench of Justice Anil Kumar Upman opined that the increasing tendency of trial courts in rejecting bail petitions in a "casual and routine manner" even in appropriate cases was concerning and needed to stop as it not only increased agony of accused persons languishing in an overcrowded prison system of India but also increased burden on High Courts.

“Denying such a right in a routine manner even in appropriate cases amounts to failure of the courts in performing the sacrosanct judicial function, which is the paramount feature of the judicial system in this country. Trial Courts functioning at the district level make up the very foundation of the Indian Judicial system which makes it even more important for the High Courts to not condone such practices of the Trial Courts.”

2013 Rape Case | Rajasthan High Court Grants Interim Bail To Asaram Bapu Till March 31 For Medical Treatment

Title: Asharam Alias Ashumal v/s State of Rajasthan

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 21

The Rajasthan High Court (Jodhpur bench) today granted interim bail till March 31 to self-styled godman Asaram Bapu, who is serving a life sentence in connection with a 2013 rape case. This order enables Asaram to walk out of jail for the first time since his arrest in 2013.

The order was passed by a bench of Justice Dinesh Mehta and Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur a week after the Supreme Court granted Bapu interim bail till March 31 to avail medical treatment.

The Top Court had granted him medical bail till March 31, 2025, enabling Asaram to undergo necessary treatment. The bench clarified that the relief was granted solely on humanitarian grounds and directed compliance with conditions imposed during the bail period. The Court also indicated that Asaram's medical status could be reassessed closer to the expiration of the bail term.

Uncorroborated Expert Evidence Not Enough To Convict When Key Witnesses Turn Hostile: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Acquittal In POCSO Case

Title: State of Rajasthan v X

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 64

While upholding a man's acquittal by the trial court in a POCSO case, the Jodhpur bench of the Rajasthan High Court held that in cases where the victim, complainant, or the key witnesses turned hostile or failed to support the prosecution's story, then conviction can't be solely based on expert/scientific evidence without supporting testimonies.

Justice Arun Monga noted that the prosecution "merely but heavily, relied on scientific evidence such as DNA and forensic reports". Referring to Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act or Section 39 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Ashiniyam, 2023 the court said that "forensic reports are only corroborative, not conclusive evidence".

The court further said that that the "law, no doubt, enables trial court to rely on expert opinions, however, such opinions are only meant to assist the court and are not binding".

Girls Often Expected To Prioritize Household & Marriage, State Obligated To Implement Their Fundamental Right To Education: Rajasthan HC

Title: Victim v State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 163

Rajasthan High Court has granted permission to the Superintendent, Government Balika Grah, to admit a 11 year old rape victim, in any Government School situated near the vicinity of the Balika Grah, and to bear expenses of her studies till she attained the age of majority.

The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand also directed the Superintendent, Balika Grah, to submit report along with documentary proof of the victim's admission in the School, and also yearly report in July, till she attained majority.

The Court observed that Right to Education was fundamental right of every child as per Article 21A of the Constitution which was further represented by the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009

Rajasthan HC Retains Sexual Harassment Charge Against Man For Showing Adult Videos To Child, Says Intent To Be Assumed When Harassment Is Proved

Title: Khyali Ram v State of Rajasthan & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 175

Rajasthan High Court ruled that comprehensive reading of Sections 11 and 30 of POCSO Act reflected that in prosecution for sexual harassment, the Special Court was mandated to presume existence of the sexual intent once the prosecution had proved commission of the act constituting sexual harassment.

These observations were given by Justice Manoj Kumar Garg while hearing a revision petition filed for charges framed against the petitioners under POCSO Act, wherein it was argued on behalf of the petitioner's counsel that the act of showing adult videos to a child did not, in isolation, constituted a criminal offence unless it was proven to be accompanied with coercion, exploitation or other unlawful acts.

POCSO Act | “Child Specific” Procedural Safeguards Can't Be Extended To Victim Who Attains Majority During Trial: Rajasthan High Court

Title: Jasaram Pander v State of Rajasthan and other connected petitions

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 192

Rajasthan High Court has ruled that procedural safeguards under Section 33(2) and 37 of the POCSO Act are contingent on the age of the victim, and have to be confined to the statutory definition of “child”. Therefore, once a victim attains the age of majority during trial pendency, these procedural safeguards cease to apply.

“While the POCSO Act is indeed a benevolent legislation, designed to safeguard children from sexual offences, the protective mechanisms embedded therein cannot be extended to adults...Such an approach would Subvert both the legislative intent and the constitutional requirement of parity in procedural fairness, thereby reducing the courtroom into a space of therapeutic justice rather than forensic adjudication.”

The bench of Justice Farjand Ali held that such procedural safeguards must cease to be applicable upon the victim attaining majority unless the Court deems it necessary in the interest of justice and psychological welfare of the witness without causing undue prejudice to the accused's fair trial rights.

While carving an exception to this ruling, the Court further ruled that by recording reasons in writing, the Court could extend the benefit of these safeguard, if deemed necessary in the interest of justice and psychological welfare of witness without causing any undue prejudice to the accused's fair trial rights.

Pregnant Minor's Willingness To Retain Pregnancy Prevails Over Her Mother's Plea To Terminate It: Rajasthan High Court

Title: X v The State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 219

The Rajasthan High Court dismissed a petition filed by a mother seeking termination of pregnancy of her minor daughter (17 years, 5 months old) in light of the daughter's unwillingness to abort the pregnancy, upholding the right of a pregnant minor victim to retain her pregnancy.

Highlighting that the minor victim had sufficient level of understanding about the consequences of her actions, the bench of Justice Chandra Prakash Shrimali observed that pregnant woman had the autonomy over her body and it was only she who had the right to choose whether to terminate the pregnancy or not.

Reference was made to the Supreme Court case of Suchita Srivastava & Anr. Vs. Chandigarh Administration wherein it was held that right to make reproductive choices was a facet of Art. 21, and the consent of the pregnant women in the matter of such choices was paramount. No entity, even the state, could speak on behalf of the pregnant person and usurp her consent.

2013 Rape Case | Rajasthan High Court Grants 6-Month Interim Bail To Asaram, Cites His 'Vegetative Condition'

Title: Asharam@ Ashumal v/s State of Rajasthan

The Rajasthan High Court suspended sentence of Asaram–was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in a 2013 rape case, for six months in view of his medical condition noting that he was in a "vegetative condition" and facilities required were not available in jail.

Taking note of Asaram's medical condition the court said:

"The petitioner, who is 86 years of age, in our opinion, deserves to be given an appropriate medical treatment. It is a right available to the convict who is suffering sentence. Although, the respondent-State has asserted that medical facilities are available in Jail, we notice that the jail authorities themselves said that the required facilities for further treatment of the accused are not available in jail. It can be seen that the accused petitioner is in a vegetative condition and while we find that the appeal has to be heard, we consider it appropriate to suspend the sentence awarded to the accused petitioner vide judgment and order dated 25.04.2018 passed by the learned Judge, Special Court, POCSO Act, 2012, Jodhpur...for a period of six months and, accordingly, it is directed that the petitioner shall be released on interim bail on medical ground for a period of six months....”

Juvenile Justice Act Only Relevant For Quantum Of Sentence, Conviction Not Vitiated If Inquiry Is Not Conducted By JJB: Rajasthan High Court

Title: Kailash v State of Rajasthan

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 222

The Rajasthan High Court held that a conviction which had been recorded cannot be held to be vitiated in law merely because the inquiry into the juvenility of the accused was not conducted by the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB). It is only the question of sentence for which the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (JJ) Act, 2015 would be attracted

The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand ruled that a recorded conviction could not be held to be vitiated in law merely because the inquiry was not conducted by the Juvenile Justice Board as required under Section 25 of the

“Otherwise, the accused who has committed a heinous offence and who did not claim juvenility before the Trial Court would be allowed to go scot free… The object under the JJ Act, 2015 dealing with the rights and liberties of the juvenile is only to ensure that he or she could be brought into the main stream by awarding lesser sentence and also directing for other facilities for welfare of the juvenile, in conflict with law, during his/her stay in any of the institutions defined under the JJ Act, 2015,” the court said.

Rajasthan HC Declines Plea By Minor Rape Victim's Father To Terminate Her Pregnancy, Cites Unwillingness & Unborn Child's Right To Life

Title: Victim v State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 268

The Rajasthan High Court has rejected a father's petition to terminate his minor daughter's pregnancy following alleged rape on the basis of the daughter's unwillingness to undergo the procedure. The Court opined that the consent given by the guardians could not override the autonomy and decision of the pregnant victim.

The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand held that granting permission, as sought by the parents, would not only violate the victim's Right to Life but also infringe the right to life of the fetus/unborn child in the womb of the victim, as guaranteed under Article 21.

Rajasthan High Court Denies Termination Of 32-Week Pregnancy To Speech & Hearing Impaired Minor, Cites Medical Report

Title: Victim v State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 289

The Rajasthan High Court refused to permit medical termination of over 32-week pregnancy of a hearing and verbally impaired minor rape survivor, in light of unfavorable opinion of the medical board which indicated serious danger that termination procedure may pose to both fetus and the girl.

Taking into account the medical report Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand in his August 8 order said:

"In the instant case, Medical Board of five Doctors was of the opinion that the petitioner is carrying pregnancy of 32 weeks and termination of such pregnancy is not advisable. As per the opinion of the Board, it would not be safe and would be life threatening to the mother due to advance gestational age and considering the age of the minor victim and looking to overall facts and circumstances, the passage of time and delay caused in approaching this Court, which is on the part of the petitioner, has only further aggravated the said aspect. There is no material available on the record of this Court on the basis of which this Court may differ with the opinion expressed by the Medical Board. Directing medical termination of this pregnancy, at such an advanced stage, would not only endanger life of the minor victim and would also affect the life of fetus in the womb".

Yardstick To Ascertain Juvenility Not Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt, Courts Should Favour Accused In Borderline Cases: Rajasthan High Court

Title: X v State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 299

Rajasthan High Court held that while undertaking an enquiry in relation to claim of juvenility of an accused, the standard need not be like a trial where the juvenility had to be proved beyond all reasonable doubts, rather if two views are possible, the Court should lean towards holding in favour of the accused to be juvenile in borderline cases.

The bench of Justice Sandeep Shah further clarified that if the documentary evidence mentioned in Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (“the Act”) were placed on record, they were to be considered relevant unless those were shown to be fabricated or manipulated.

“…if so called documents are available, then there is no requirement for the Court, the board or the committee to go for medical test for age determination. The question is thus answered accordingly.”

Rajasthan High Court Shocked At Death Penalty In Case With 'No Trace Of Evidence'; Acquits Man Accused Of Killing Siblings, Raping Sister

Title: State of Rajasthan v Arjun Singh and

Arjun Singh v State Of Rajasthan & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 344

While answering the death reference in negative, Rajasthan High Court acquitted a man convicted for murder of two siblings and raping the sister.

In doing so, a division bench of Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur and Justice Anuroop Singhi expressed its "astonishment" over trial court's decision of awarding death penalty to the appellant in a case wherein they struggled to find any trace of evidence supporting prosecution's case.

"It is a bit astonishing to note that a case wherein this Court is facing difficulty to find any trace of evidence supporting the case of the prosecution, the accused/appellant has been convicted with death sentence by the learned Trial Court. Not a whisper is found in the impugned judgment so as to make the present case fall within the category of “rarest of the rare” case"

It was also highlighted that no blood stains were found on the alleged weapon based on which it could be said that the same was used for committing the crime. In this light, it was opined that when the weapon was devoid of any blood stain, mere recovery of shirt having victim's blood stains could not be the sole basis to prove charge of murder.

2013 Rape Case | Rajasthan High Court Grants 6-Month Interim Bail To Asaram, Cites His 'Vegetative Condition'

Title: Asharam@ Ashumal v/s State of Rajasthan

The Rajasthan High Court suspended sentence of Asaram–was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in a 2013 rape case, for six months in view of his medical condition noting that he was in a "vegetative condition" and facilities required were not available in jail.

Taking note of Asaram's medical condition the court said:

"The petitioner, who is 86 years of age, in our opinion, deserves to be given an appropriate medical treatment. It is a right available to the convict who is suffering sentence. Although, the respondent-State has asserted that medical facilities are available in Jail, we notice that the jail authorities themselves said that the required facilities for further treatment of the accused are not available in jail. It can be seen that the accused petitioner is in a vegetative condition and while we find that the appeal has to be heard, we consider it appropriate to suspend the sentence awarded to the accused petitioner vide judgment and order dated 25.04.2018 passed by the learned Judge, Special Court, POCSO Act, 2012, Jodhpur...for a period of six months and, accordingly, it is directed that the petitioner shall be released on interim bail on medical ground for a period of six months....”

Rajasthan High Court Quashes Order Rejecting Compensation To Minor Rape Survivor For Not Furnishing Details Of Income

Title: Victim v/s State of Rajasthan

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 360

The Rajasthan High Court set aside a trial court order which had rejected a minor rape victim's plea for compensation under State Victim Compensation Scheme on the technical ground that she did not furnish details of her source of income for making payment of her school fee, etc.

In doing so the court observed that such cases are to be dealt with sensitivity by courts and the crime being a dehumanizing one, compensation should be awarded as a solace to the victim.

Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand in his order said:

"The crime of rape can be regarded as the highest form of torture inflicted upon womanhood. It not only inflicts physical torture upon the body of the woman, but also adversely affects her mental, psychological and emotional well-being. Therefore, rape is treated as the most heinous crime against the very basic human right conferred upon the woman i.e., 'the right of life and dignity'. It is not merely a sexual offence, but an act of aggression aimed at degrading and humiliating the woman. Such cases are required to be handled by the Courts with utmost sensitivity and high responsibility. Crime of rape committed with the minor victim is a dehumanizing one and an affront to human dignity. Hence, compensation should be awarded as a form of solace to the victim".

Juvenile Accused Of Attempt To Commit Rape Can't Be Tried As Adult Since Offence Not 'Heinous' Under JJ Act: Rajasthan High Court

Title: A v/s State of Rajasthan & Anr and connected petition

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 361

The Rajasthan High Court set aside an appellate court's order remitting a POCSO case lodged against two juveniles to the Children's Court for conducting a trial against them as "adult accused". In doing so the court said that offence alleged against the petitioners do not fall in the category of "heinous offences" under the Juvenile Justice Act 2015 as none of the offences alleged carried a minimum sentence 7 years or more.

The court said that the JJ Act has not classified or defined the offences for which punishment under any statute is imprisonment for more than 07 years, but no mandatory minimum punishment of imprisonment for 07 years or more has been prescribed.

It further said that “heinous offences" defined under Section 2(33) cannot be interpreted in a way, which may be less beneficial for the child, who is alleged to have committed an offence falling between the category of “serious offences‟ and “heinous offences‟. This was because the JJ Act treats all children below 18 years equally except in the age group of 16-18 years, who has committed “heinous offences".

'Law Is Dynamic, Must Adapt To Societal Realities': Rajasthan High Court Quashes Rape Case After Victim's Marriage With Accused

Title: F v State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 384

The Rajasthan High Court has observed that law of any civilized society is not definite, and it must change according to the demands and circumstances of the society.

“Law and transformation is a unique concept which highlights the changes in social problems and their solutions through legal…Law not only lays down the norms that are acceptable to a given society, but it also lays down the norms regarding when the society should adapt and act in the interest of its own welfare.”

The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand was hearing a quashing petition filed by a rape accused under IPC and POCSO, in light of his marriage with the now-major victim.

It opined that crime of rape is the highest form of torture inflicted upon womanhood, and such cases should be handled by the Court with utmost sensitivity and high responsibility. However, at the same time, it also highlighted the victim's will and clear intention to lead a happy married life with the accused.

POCSO Conviction Can't Be Based Solely On DNA Evidence When Prosecutrix Turns Hostile: Rajasthan High Court

Title: State of Rajasthan v Shyam Kumar

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 390

The Rajasthan High Court upheld a trial court order acquitting an accused under the POCSO Act, stating that no person can be convicted solely based on the DNA report, in the absence of any specific allegations of rape/sexual assault by the prosecutrix.

A written report was filed against the accused by the father of prosecutrix, alleging abduction of his minor daughter. Case was registered against the accused, but when the statements of the prosecutrix were taken, she did not support the allegation of sexual/assault or rape against him and was declared hostile.

Reference was made to the division bench decisions of the Court in Dalla Ram v State of Rajasthan and Bhagwan Bairwa v State of Rajasthan, and it was opined that no conviction could be made solely on the basis of DNA report, and the same could not be treated as corroborative evidence.

'Shameful Act By One Entrusted With Shaping Futures': Rajasthan High Court Confirms KVS Teacher's Dismissal For Sexual Misconduct With Student

Title: Yatendra Kumar Nagori v The Special Secretary Cum Vice Chairperson & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 395

Rajasthan High Court observed that in Indian culture and society, women are respected and honoured for the well-being of the community, and any misconduct towards them invites serious consequences.

The observations were made by the division bench of Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur and Justice Ravi Chirania while rejecting the petition filed against the termination of a primary teacher at Kendra Vidyalaya pursuant to a disciplinary enquiry that confirmed his involvement in immoral sexual harassment and misbehavior with a child of class VI.

“In our considered opinion, even the statement of victim child “A” is sufficient to bring home the allegations levelled against the Petitioner. However, the respondents have conducted a thorough enquiry before passing the order dated 16.10.2015.”

Telangana High Court

'Conviction Does Not Extinguish Right To Prove Innocence': Telangana High Court Permits POCSO Convict To Undergo Second DNA Test

Clawrance Fransis vs. State of TS

2025 LiveLaw (Tel) 93

Permitting a rape convict to undergo a second DNA test, the Telangana High Court said that a conviction does not extinguish an accused/convict's continuing right to defend themselves and present best possible evidence to prove their innocence, when there is a doubt on veracity of crucial evidence like a DNA report.

The order was passed by a Division Bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice B.R. Madhusudhan Rao in an application filed in an appeal challenging the 80-year-old man's POCSO conviction.

Uttarakhand High Court

Uttarakhand High Court Suspends POCSO Conviction & Grants Bail To Man After Alleged Victim Pleads For His Release

Case Title: Rampal v. State of Uttarakhand

Case citation : 2025 LiveLaw (21) UTT

The Uttarakhand High Court has suspended the order of conviction and sentence passed against a man, who was implicated for allegedly kidnapping and committing rape and aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a minor girl, after the victim herself pleaded for suspension of his sentence and release on bail.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice G. Narendar and Justice Alok Mahra also remarked that the trial Court judgment is based on “no evidence” and critically observed –

“In the absence of critical evidence relating to the place of commission of offence, or any forensic evidence linking the accused to the crime, we find the judgment of conviction more than shocking, and that too a judgment of conviction under Section 5 of the POCSO Act.”