“Ancient Indian Judicial and mediation jurisprudence is found in our old texts including Ramayana (रामायण), Mahabharata (महाभारत), Bhagavad Gita (श्रीमद्भगवद्गीता)”: The Court. It also clarified Yesterday that matters falling under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) are ineligible for mediation, settlement, or compromise.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court Yesterday (March 7th) underscored the significance of mediation by drawing upon various religious and philosophical texts such as the Ramayana, Mahabharata, Bhagavad Gita, Bible, Qur’an, and Kautilya’s Arthashastra.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma referenced verses from these religious texts to emphasize their advocacy for mediation. The court emphasized that to fully appreciate the potential of mediation in achieving finality in disputes, it is essential to delve into these texts beyond their religious connotations.
The court articulated,
“This Court thus, opines that it is not on the basis of the British or other foreign Jurisprudence alone but on the basis of unplundered wealth of ancient Indian Judicial and mediation jurisprudence which is found in our old texts including Ramayana (रामायण), Mahabharata (महाभारत), Bhagavad Gita (श्रीमद्भगवद्गीता), when read and understood in detail in context of the messages conveyed in certain chapters, subject to their true interpretation and understanding without being referred to as religious texts alone.”
Furthermore, the court cited verses from the Qur’an, Bible, and Arthashastra to illustrate the historical and philosophical endorsement of mediation as a conflict resolution tool.
For instance, the court referenced Matthew 5:9 from the Holy Bible, which urges Christians to seek peaceful means of resolving disputes, and Matthew 18:15-17, which advises seeking the intervention of a neutral third party in case of a deadlock. Similarly, the court highlighted the Islamic perspective, citing various sources such as the Qur’an, Sunna, Ijma, and Qiyas, all of which advocate for peaceful conflict settlement within and between communities.
“As per the Holy Bible, Matthew 5:9 urges Christians to use useful means to resolve disputes amicably and that those who are peacemakers shall be called sons of God. Matthew 18:15-17 states that in case of a deadlock, the parties should contact a third neutral party to get their issue resolved. Even in Islam, the Holy Qur’an, the Sunna, the Ijma, and the Qiyas support peaceful conflict settlement within the Islamic community, between Islamic and non-Islamic communities, and between two or more non-Muslim communities…. Arthashastra (अथथशास्त्र) by Kautilya and the principles enumerated by the judges, commentaries, lectures and mediation training on mediation process will have the potential to give finality to disputes between the parties,”
-the judgment stated.
Moreover, the court invoked Kautilya’s Arthashastra, emphasizing its principles along with insights from judges, commentaries, lectures, and mediation training. These contributions collectively enhance the potential of mediation in delivering conclusive resolutions between disputing parties.
The judgment thus underscores the multifaceted endorsement of mediation across different religious and philosophical traditions, emphasizing its effectiveness in fostering harmony and resolving conflicts. The Court, however, made it clear that cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) cannot be referred to mediation and settled or compromised.
The court’s remarks were prompted by a petition submitted by an individual seeking to overturn a trial court ruling that had dismissed a complaint lodged under Section 7 of the POCSO Act in 2015. Section 7 of the Act penalizes individuals who engage in acts of sexual assault, defined as touching the genitalia, anus, or breasts of a child or compelling the child to touch these body parts, among other behaviors, with sexual intent, excluding penetration.
The complaint was lodged by the father of two minors-a boy and a girl-alleging that they had been subject to inappropriate touching by their maternal uncle. The trial court had chosen to mediate the disputes between the complainant and his spouse, including the registration of the POCSO complaint, ultimately closing the case following a settlement reached between the parties.
However, the complainant subsequently petitioned the High Court, contesting the trial court’s decision and claiming that he had been coerced by his wife and brother-in-law into withdrawing the complaint.
Upon reviewing the matter, Justice Sharma asserted that offenses under the POCSO Act are non-negotiable and cannot be subjected to mediation, settlement, or compromise. She emphasized that monetary compensation cannot serve as a resolution for such grave offenses. The judge further noted that any attempt to mediate or compromise cases falling under the POCSO Act would undermine the principles of justice and disregard the rights of the victims, thereby warranting no consideration from a mediator.
However, in the present case, the Court declined to revive the complaint, noting that a considerable span of nine years had elapsed since the trial court’s ruling. Additionally, it was revealed that the children had become pawns in their parents’ personal vendettas, further complicating the matter.
“Hence, considering the thorough examination presented in the preceding sections, this Court is disinclined to grant the requested reliefs in this petition, namely, the annulment of the order dated 08.04.2015 and the reinstatement of the complaint filed under the POCSO Act before the learned Special Court, particularly when the victims themselves have not petitioned for such action. Therefore, the plea outlined in this petition is hereby dismissed,”
-decreed the Court, denying the father’s appeal.
CASE TITLE:
Rajeev Dagar v State & Ors.
READ/DOWNLOAD JUDGEMENT-
Click Here to Read Previous Reports of POCSO Cases
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
