Child Sexual Abuse Serious Issue, Perpetrators Should Be Adequately Punished Irrespective Of Background, Domestic Responsibilities: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that the child sexual abuse is a serious issue, being “pervasive and disturbing”, which deserves adequate attention of every stakeholder directly or indirectly connected with administration of justice and judicial process.

Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain said that the issue requires to be addressed with lot of sensitivity and sensibility, adding that it is the solemn duty of the court to award adequate punishment to the accused, irrespective of his social, economic background or other domestic responsibilities.

“The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 was enacted to protect children from offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment and pornography and to provide for establishment of Special Courts for trial of such offences. The preamble of the POCSO Act also reflects that the Government of India has acceded on 11.12.1992 to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations, which has prescribed a set of standards to be followed by all State parties in securing the best interests of the child,” the court said.

It added that the POCSO Act considered sexual exploitation and sexual abuse of children as heinous crimes which need to be effectively addressed.

“The Child Sexual Abuse is a serious issue/problem being pervasive and disturbing and large numbers of children are being subjected to physical, emotional, and sexual abuse. The Child Sexual Abuse deserves adequate attention of every stake holder directly or indirectly connected with administration of justice and judicial process,” the court said.

Justice Jain made the observations while dismissing an appeal moved by a man challenging his conviction for committing penetrative sexual assault on his 4 year old son.

The court upheld his conviction for the offence under section 6 of the POCSO Act and under section 377 of Indian Penal Code as well as the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with a fine of Rs.10,000.

Justice Jain observed that the trial court had already taken a lenient view against the appellant and that there was no reason to interfere in the punishment awarded to him.

“In the present case, the appellant being the biological father of PW2/victim A was under social, family, moral duty to protect PW2/victim A but the appellant had sexually exploited PW2/victim A on various occasions. The crime committed by the appellant cannot be taken lightly. It is a crime not only against the individual but against the fabric of the society and family,” the court said.

It added that impugned judgment passed by the trial court was well reasoned and passed after considering relevant facts proved on record.

“There is no reason to interfere in impugned judgment. Hence, the present appeal is dismissed,” the court said.

Counsel for Appellant: Advocate Deepanshu

Counsel for Respondents: APP Utkarsh appeared for the State

Title: AJEET SINGH v. THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANOTHER

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1053

Click Here To Read Order